David Petraeus resigns

[MacNut]

Originally Posted by hulugu

Chain of command.



Let's take this idea at face value for a moment. So, what's the cover-up? The White House had State promulgate the idea that the attack in Benghazi was caused by a YouTube video rather than being a pre-planned terrorist attack.

Is that it?

Republican apparatchiks have tried to argue that there was a "stand-down" order, that armed Predators were waived away (along with F-18s and AC-130Js), that the CIA agents had lasers (which proves something though I'm still not sure what), and that the President was off gallivanting in Las Vegas.

And, considering the fury that Republicans have for this issue is hilarious considering how little they cared when Dick Cheney leaked secrets to a New York Times reporter to make his case that Iraq had WMDs and then used those reports to prove his case to the public. That cover-up, which cost the lives of thousands, can't get a Republican out of bed, but Benghazi!

Supposedly all the agency's starting sharing information after 9/11. Has anything changed when the CIA doesn't know what the FBI is doing and the White House is going on different information. The problem seems to be that everyone is in the dark and not knowing what the other guy is doing. This seems to go beyond the attacks on the embassy and more about miscommunication.

[citizenzen]

Curious whether Petaeus' testimony before the Intelligence Committee has swayed any conservatives on this issue.

Excerpts from the New York Times below.

Petraeus Says U.S. Tried to Avoid Tipping Off Terrorists After Libya Attack
Published: November 16, 2012

WASHINGTON — David H. Petraeus, the former director of the Central Intelligence Agency, told lawmakers on Friday that classified intelligence reports revealed that the deadly assault on the American diplomatic mission in Libya was a terrorist attack, but that the administration refrained from saying it suspected that the perpetrators of the attack were Al Qaeda affiliates and sympathizers to avoid tipping off the groups.

Some intelligence analysts worried, for instance, that identifying the groups could reveal that American spy services were eavesdropping on the militants — a fact most insurgents are already aware of. Justice Department lawyers expressed concern about jeopardizing the F.B.I.’s criminal inquiry in the attacks. Other officials voiced concern that making the names public, at least right away, would create a circular reporting loop and hamper efforts to trail the militants.

Senator Mark Udall, Democrat of Colorado, said that Mr. Petraeus explained to lawmakers that the final document was put in front of all the senior agency leaders, including Mr. Petraeus, and everyone signed off on it.

Ms. Feinstein, read the final unclassified talking points to reporters:

“The currently available information suggests that the demonstrations in Benghazi were spontaneously inspired by the protests at the U.S. Embassy in Cairo and evolved into a direct assault against the U.S. diplomatic post in Benghazi and subsequently its annex. There are indications that extremists participated in the violent demonstrations.

“This assessment may change as additional information is collected and analyzed and as currently available information continues to be evaluated.

“The investigation is ongoing, and the U.S. government is working with Libyan authorities to bring to justice those responsible for the deaths of U.S. citizens.”

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/11/17/wo...nted=1&_r=0&hp

[MacNut]

Originally Posted by citizenzen

Curious whether Petaeus' testimony before the Intelligence Committee has swayed any conservatives on this issue.

Excerpts from the New York Times below.

Did the video outrage cause more problems in the region. I think that Rice took the fall for a lot if this. She was going off of what she was told. I understand them not wanting to divoldge secrets but how much violonce was there from the video aftermath.