Skip to main content

View Diary: The Petraeus Puzzle (25 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Ummm...what? There's a bizarre subtext here (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sassy, kkjohnson, realalaskan

    In the middle of this diary about Petraeus' affair and the players there, you make some leap first to lay out thinking that Petraeus might have about a too-close relationship with Israel, and the impact of the ongoing US-Palestinian on US' interests. Then, you start into still another tangent about a supposed Israeli false-flag intelligence operation involving Pakistani terrorists operating in Iran.

    What any of this has to do with Patraeus, or the affair, or any possible security breach there, I cannot fathom. In fact, this diary itself seems a bit of a false-flag operation. You start off on Patraeus and the possible motivations of the women involved, and then we're reading about Bush Administration concerns about Mossad operations?

    I'm not sure if you're just taking the opportunity to catch some eyeballs based on the Petraeus scandal to go off on a rant about Israel as a rogue agent hurting our interests. It certainly reads that way. We start with Petraeus' affiar, and then we have an anti-Zionist screed.

    The other alternative for the tangential discussion (and calling it tangential is probably too generous, since I don't see any contact point at all) is that you're implying that maybe Mossad has something to do with Petraeus' downfall?

    Either way, I find this rather offensive. The linkage isn't there in your diary, and it just seems like a random attempt to go on about how bad the Jews are.

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

    by FischFry on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 06:16:08 AM PST

    •  Well... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, Glinda, semiot, Yasuragi

      The 2010 Perry article seems to have Petraeus' fingerprints on it; there are ample links to follow the ensuing controversy as the diary mentions.  That in itself makes an interesting departure point, given that Petraeus was beloved of the Right earlier in his career.  Whether Petraeus was the leaker the story is clearly about him and the temptation to suppose he was involved in leaking it is strong.

      As for the more scurrilous "false flag" leak I thought it was very interesting that the Commentary author hinted that Petraeus, now as CIA director, had a duty to investigate the leak and offered only three alternatives in not pursuing it; one of which was that he had leaked it himself.

      Given Petraeus' history as a person who knows how to manage the media it seemed instructive that he played a central role in this relationship, the one with Israel I mean, at such a critical time.

      But the real point is to cast a little scepticism on the circumstances surrounding the FBI investigation; given all the leaks and the public calling out of Petraeus by name in that instance it seemed a little rich that his email account wouldn't have received a bit of attention by any genuine investigation.  Remember that these administration leaks were an issue with Republicans at the time.

      I have no idea what the Israelis would have thought of it but it was pretty clear that neo-conservatives were bent out of shape as recently as January this year which puts the incident on a parallel time-line with the affair and the beginning of FBI involvement with the General's correspondence.

      In that context the FBI alerting Cantor seems relevant and perhaps revealing that there is more to this than a mere dalliance.

      •  First, Cantor alerted FBI, not other way around (0+ / 0-)

        That throwaway line is raising even more red flags for me about your motivation and the subtext you're laying out. Cantor is Jewish, of course. Are you suggesting that this is relevant? He was notified by the other woman, but there could  be any number of reasons for that. His position of leadership in the House comes to mind, but it might be as simple as he was the woman's congressman.

        The more you right, the more convinced I am that you are subtly implying some linkage here -- either with pro-Israel conservatives or the Mossad itself.

        There is literally no known factual basis for that supposition. Which makes your raising it very disturbing.

        Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

        by FischFry on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 06:59:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Write, not right (0+ / 0-)

          I meant to write this:

          The more you write, the more convinced I am that you are subtly implying some linkage here  -- either with pro-Israel conservatives or the Mossad itself
          It's funny the way the brain makes associations -- I type a word that sounds like the word I intended. You take a scandal that has to with an the extramarital affair of a general cum CIA director, and try to spin it into some nefarious zionist plot to discredit him.

          Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you: Armisticeproject.org

          by FischFry on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 07:03:06 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Really? (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wasatch, Yasuragi
          Eric Cantor, the House majority leader, said Saturday an F.B.I. employee whom his staff described as a whistle-blower told him about Mr. Petraeus’s affair and a possible security breach in late October, which was after the investigation had begun.
          Sounds like an FBI employee notified Cantor in late October, well after we are given to believe the investigation was conducted, probably after Petraeus was interviewed by the FBI if the rough time-line being reported is accurate.  Not sure I understand your point otherwise.
    •  I, as well, found it difficult to tie some of this (0+ / 0-)

      together coherently.
      However, I did not sense any anti-zion slant, but I'm not sensitized to look for it.
      All in all, the Diary took some turns that made it less coherent, but very thought provoking.

      "If you tell the truth, you won't have to remember anything", Mark Twain

      by Cruzankenny on Sun Nov 11, 2012 at 06:51:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  It Seems I Should Have... (0+ / 0-)

        Said that at a time when a number of leaks on national security matters which seemed to be promoting narratives favourable to the Obama administration, and which were publicly deplored by Republicans who demanded that they be properly investigated, it seems a bit rich for the FBI to claim they just 'stumbled' into Petraeus' personal email account.  

        Especially where everyone seems to agree that General Petaeus has a finely tuned sense of handling the media and there have been apparent past leaks about Petraeus or accusations of past leaks by Petraeus made publicly without emphatic rebuttal or denial.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site