This was inspired by an article by Micheal Brenner called "I, Petraeus" in which he discusses the odd and convoluted way that General Petraeus has bounced back from being General Betrayus a few short years ago to running operations in the Middle East and now heading up the CIA, all at the bequest of the democrats, the same democrats that once found him unacceptable.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/....
A taste, beginning:
General David Petraeus, newly installed Director of the CIA, is now the most influential figure in making American foreign policy. He has unrivaled prestige in Washington and among the public at large, he has close allies in the Pentagon and White House, and receives reflexive deference from President Obama. Moreover, he has vaunting ambition and a steely will -- his boyish looks notwithstanding. His foremost objectives will be to ensure that the end game in Afghanistan, the tense standoff with Pakistan, and the question of the United States' presence in Iraq in no way detract from his reputation as being the master of counterterrorism who has salvaged a measure of success from those dubious operations.
Since that reputation is based on image more than on hard accomplishment, how the game of intelligence appraisal and threat assessment is played will be critically important. Petraeus will not hesitate to use the authority and influence at his disposal to push for actions that improve the odds on avoiding unspinnable outcomes in any of those locales.
And ending with:
For a man of ambition like Petraeus, it is a tempting -- irresistible? -- opportunity.
I commented:
The advancement of Petraeus is one of those modern mysteries that defy analysis; particularly since he was so recently seen as coming to the rescue of GWB with the falsely titled "surge strategy" and pilloried for it by the democrats. So a few years ago he was seen as a treacherous betrayer of the interests of the United States and I think that was a valid assessment but the next thing I hear is that he is being hired by those same democrats to be first their General in the Middle East and then their spook in charge of all things clandestine and underhanded, something radically changed and I don't believe it was Petraeus's stripes or skills.
Why did the democrats reverse their opinion on this man from bad to good, what made them appoint someone who was considered a Benedict Arnold so very recently, just who is in charge in Washington anyway?
To which penndl responded:
Reading his wikipedia profile it seems very likely he will eventually be President.
Eliciting this from me:
Yup, sanity and good sense are obsolete now as we enter our modern Rome through the backdoor marked "TwilightZone Enter Here" Call me crazy but I can't help thinking that there are sinister forces in the world and that they are setting the stage for a new play by that renowned playwright John Q. Balesaybubber.
Actually I have been toying with the notion of calling up Stephen King and getting his impression of the state of the nation. If anyone can see beneath our glossy surface and penetrate to the evil that seems to be gaining hold it's Mr. King, this is his area of expertise and I'd really like to see him on the TV setting us straight about what's going on.
Penndl again:
This quote from an article at the link below should put to rest any ideas of being crazy. (http://eng¬lish.aljaz¬eera.net/...)
"This was not the intent of the framers of the US constitution. Their vision was one of citizen legislators, who would temporarily put aside their careers in business, the profession¬s, or academia, to serve the public good for a time before returning to their communities. Those who originally conceived the US system did not foresee the rise of a permanent class of professional legislator¬s, motivated to ignore the greater good in order to sustain themselves in office".
And, yes Stephen King has an abstract sort of knowledge into the minds of the insiders. So did Twain and Wells. Call him if you can, we all need some clarity.
Clarity yes, some clarity would be refreshing in a world of conspiracies; and by conspiracies I mean any plan to achieve a goal by working behind the scenes, the desire to leave no fingerprints, the process of saying one thing knowing you are doing the other, getting your way by subterfuge and deceit.
We generally think of it as a group effort but I think one can play as well, it just takes lying and laying down false clues as to what you are attempting to accomplish and it is a conspiracy. If this is the definition than the world runs on conspiracies both small and great, people singularly and in small and large groups avoid letting other people know what they are really doing, they keep it a secret between themselves.
The odd fate of David Petraeus begs me to see a conspiracy, it pleads with me to ask how can this be, I feel like I am missing whole hunks of the picture and I dearly wish I knew what was going on under the stories they tell us. Is this guy some reincarnated Roman general who was fated to eventually float to the top in some other lifetime, what sort of magic charm is behind this man's apparent sustainability and rise to power?
Head of the Central Intelligence Agency, the most influential voice in controlling our foreign policy according to the article, something must, I repeat must be going on behind our backs to explain this ascendancy to such power. Some one or some ones think he is the right man for the job and they gave it the go ahead, he is going to perform as advertised, they know their man, he has been hand picked by conspirators.
Currently my absolute favorite conspiracy theorist is Mike Ruppert, favorite because he talks a good game and he has a sincerity about him that appears genuine, I trust the guy and he has some whopping conspiracies up his sleeve. Years ago he was a gung ho Los Angeles narcotics detective who stumbled on a CIA drug distribution operation and refused to look away as advised and after losing that job he began to investigate and did an amazing job of it, he truly sounds like he knows some of what has been going on below our consciousness, things some people don't want us to know.
On November 15, 1996, Ruppert stood at the town hall meOn November 15, 1996, Ruppert stood at the town hall meeting at Locke High School in Los Angeles and said to Director of Central Intelligence John Deutch, "I am a former Los Angeles Police narcotics detective. I worked South Central Los Angeles and I can tell you, Director Deutch, emphatically and without equivocation, that the Agency has dealt drugs in this country for a long time." He then referred Deutch to three specific CIA agency operations known as Amadeus, Pegasus and Watchtower. At the meeting, Ruppert publicly confronted Deutch, saying that in his experience as an LAPD narcotics officer he has seen evidence of CIA complicity in drug dealing for a long time.
Michael Ruppert quoted one entry from Oliver North's diary dated July 5, 1985, which said that $14 million to buy weapons for the Contras, "came from drugs." and he wouldn't need to mention the two hundred and fifty other such entries in his diary, which refer to narcotics.
http://www.kingsofconspiracy.c...
If Mr. Ruppert is to be believed than David Petraeus is now the head of a clandestine drug smuggling operation (for the money it brings in) which no doubt has interests in Afghanistan the home of heroin and now thanks to US foreign policy, permanent fortresses. I could swear I smell a conspiracy somewhere, I'm almost 100% sure that they are not telling us what their true intentions are: they being those forces that have conceived and brought about recent events; why, because they intend to use them to their advantage in the near future, they are shaping the future.
So I'll ask again, what happened to general Betrayus, what made a heel into a loaf, why was this man so objectionable to the democrats one minute and a hero the next. Petraeus hasn't changed but the attitudes of those around him sure have; to the extent of putting him in a position of having enormous secret power, the kind of power that is above the law, the kind that accomplishes conspiracies at the drop of a hat, I wonder why that is, who should I ask, who would tell me?