Register FAQ / Rules Forum Spy Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
Go Back   MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
Old Nov 15, 2012, 04:50 PM   #76
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
I predict news articles by the weekend (after he testifies) that claim Petraeus is out for revenge for "being made" to step down, a liar, and/or can't be trusted.
I think he's taking full responsibility without trying to shift blame. And as for Benghazi scandal/incident, the president is taking responsibility for that and not trying to pin it on Sec. Clinton or Susan Rice.

There's no coverup, just a real security oversight that is the president's fault and it's best that he owns up to it under his watch, and of course poor judgment by the general in his personal life.

The GOP won't get any mileage off of this one as they will have plenty to chew on in 2014 if the economy is not significantly better and will stand to gain seats on that issue.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 05:34 PM   #77
Scepticalscribe
macrumors 603
 
Scepticalscribe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: Kite flying
Quote:
Originally Posted by likemyorbs View Post
Ok i know I'm going to take a lot of heat for this comment, but here its goes:
Look at his wife Holly, she's effing hideous. I truly feel bad for him. She was gorgeous when they got married too, now she looks 10 years older than him. Come on guys, don't tell me it wouldn't take everything inside you to resist that affair...I can understand how he caved.
Yes, you are going to take heat for what is a deliberately insulting and grossly offensive remark. "Effing hideous"? And yes, sigh. Not surprisingly, it smacks of the usual horrible misogynistic nonsense disguised - as it so often is - by by the merest veneer of pseudo rationalism. You could well have written that she is not as attractive as she was, but, no, you could not resist the cheap shot and nasty sneer.

In any case, re General Petraeus, I daresay that if this duplicitous behaviour is, in any way, characteristic of his previous conduct, that it might offer a possible 'rational' explanation as to why one may 'look 10 years older' than him once such matters become public. Betrayal - and public humiliation - in such matters of intimacy must be wearing and tearing on one's psychological health, one's emotions, and one's life, not to mention one's appearance. Generally, those playing away from home in such affairs get to think - and perhaps feel - somewhat rejuvenated, while those who endure betrayal may well find the experience somewhat draining, and, dare one say it, rather aging. You know, finely etched lines, a drawn face. A harrowed expression that Botox will hardly remedy....

I know. Actually, I get the sense from your post suggests that the sole criterion for judging a woman is one based on appearance, and that no other criterion merits respect, notice, monogamy or putting effort and energy into a relationship.

What a crass post.

The bottom line for guys like General Petraeus is, if you cannot control yourself, you do not deserve to control others, and above all, you should not hold such a position where your transgressions can become a security issue.

Potential blackmail is not really the issue here; possible lapses of security are.
Scepticalscribe is offline   4 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 05:53 PM   #78
CorvusCamenarum
macrumors 65816
 
CorvusCamenarum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham, AL
Quote:
Originally Posted by 63dot View Post
I think he's taking full responsibility without trying to shift blame. And as for Benghazi scandal/incident, the president is taking responsibility for that and not trying to pin it on Sec. Clinton or Susan Rice.

There's no coverup, just a real security oversight that is the president's fault and it's best that he owns up to it under his watch, and of course poor judgment by the general in his personal life.
As put forth by Senator Graham, the $64,000 question is: if the CIA were running the Benghazi show as we've been told, and were in charge of security, then why was the ambassador asking for extra security from...the State Department? It's reasonable to assume that if the CIA had charge of security, the ambassador would know this and know where to properly direct his requests.
__________________
Much of modern liberalism consists of people trying to get revenge on the football players to whom they felt inferior in school.
CorvusCamenarum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 06:03 PM   #79
skunk
macrumors Demi-God
 
skunk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: Republic of Ukistan
Quote:
Originally Posted by likemyorbs View Post
Ok i know I'm going to take a lot of heat for this comment
I can't think why.
__________________
"The louder he talked of his honor, the faster we counted the spoons." -- Ralph Waldo Emerson
skunk is offline   6 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:01 PM   #80
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
As put forth by Senator Graham, the $64,000 question is: if the CIA were running the Benghazi show as we've been told, and were in charge of security, then why was the ambassador asking for extra security from...the State Department? It's reasonable to assume that if the CIA had charge of security, the ambassador would know this and know where to properly direct his requests.
Either Graham has a point or he's trying to find something that is not really a point. I don't suspect he will leave it alone but I hope more is found out so at least it can be avoided in the future.

The worst conspiracy theories say that "Obama" covered this up because an election was on. But it takes time for facts to sift through and find anything improper. Had Watergate been an issue and broke out a month or two before the 1972 election and some of the major players were out in the open, I doubt it would have had an effect on the election.
63dot is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:07 PM   #81
iJohnHenry
Banned
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: On tenterhooks
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
I can't think why.
Apply yourself.
iJohnHenry is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:11 PM   #82
Huntn
macrumors 604
 
Huntn's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: The Misty Mountains
Quote:
Originally Posted by likemyorbs View Post
Ok i know I'm going to take a lot of heat for this comment, but here its goes:
Look at his wife Holly, she's effing hideous. I truly feel bad for him. She was gorgeous when they got married too, now she looks 10 years older than him. Come on guys, don't tell me it wouldn't take everything inside you to resist that affair...I can understand how he caved.
But do you approve? This kind of **** in the CIA is a big issue if and when it comes to light.
__________________
The modern business ethos: "I'm worth it, you're not, and I'm a glutton!"
MBP, 2.2 GHz intel i7, Radeon HD 6750M, Bootcamp: W7.
PC: i5 4670k, 8GB RAM, Asus GTX670 (2GB VRAM), W7.
Huntn is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:26 PM   #83
LizKat
macrumors 68020
 
LizKat's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: Catskill Mountains
Quote:
Originally Posted by likemyorbs View Post
Ok i know I'm going to take a lot of heat for this comment ~snip~
Quote:
Originally Posted by skunk View Post
I can't think why.
Quote:
Originally Posted by iJohnHenry View Post
Apply yourself.
Right. I figured let the guy's remark just hang there for his mom to admire but what do I know. So now I'll weigh in.

@ likemyorbs: Here in the mountains, no man makes a public remark about another man's wife. Not how she looks, and not how she cooks, and not nothin' no how no way. As far as I remember, that was also true in New York City. Maybe it's different in Jersey. Or maybe not. Good luck finding out. Ol' Dave is probably too busy to look someone up in cyberspace but the real world can be a whole different thing.
LizKat is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:45 PM   #84
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by likemyorbs View Post
Look at his wife Holly, she's effing hideous.
I guess things changed from when they were younger and she was the daughter of a four-star general and better looking than the awkward cadet pictured below.

One can only hope that during this period she banged every man she could. Because if this picture did David any justice, it was he who looked "effing hideous".

And according to your values, that would have been a perfectly understandable choice for her to make.

Attached Thumbnails
Click image for larger version

Name:	holly-west-point-edit.jpg
Views:	13
Size:	37.2 KB
ID:	377557  
citizenzen is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 07:56 PM   #85
likemyorbs
Banned
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Location: NJ
Send a message via AIM to likemyorbs
Quote:
Originally Posted by citizenzen View Post

And according to your values, that would have been a perfectly understandable choice for her to make.

That's different. She's a woman. It's only ok when men do it...

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Huntn View Post
But do you approve? This kind of **** in the CIA is a big issue if and when it comes to light.
No of course not, but I can understand where he was coming from. Doesn't make it right. If he wants a lil sumthin sumthin on the side, there's ways to get it without compromising national security.

----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by LizKat View Post
Right. I figured let the guy's remark just hang there for his mom to admire but what do I know. So now I'll weigh in.

@ likemyorbs: Here in the mountains, no man makes a public remark about another man's wife. As far as I remember, that was also true in New York City. Maybe it's different in Jersey.
Clearly you haven't seen any of the reality shows that come out of this state. We're very blunt people in these parts. And for the record, my mom agreed...
likemyorbs is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 08:17 PM   #86
CorvusCamenarum
macrumors 65816
 
CorvusCamenarum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham, AL
Quote:
Originally Posted by 63dot View Post
The worst conspiracy theories say that "Obama" covered this up because an election was on. But it takes time for facts to sift through and find anything improper. Had Watergate been an issue and broke out a month or two before the 1972 election and some of the major players were out in the open, I doubt it would have had an effect on the election.
http://freebeacon.com/petraeus-knew-...nghazi-attack/

Quote:
CNN reports that former Central Intelligence Agency director David H. Petraeus wants to tell Congress that he knew “almost immediately” that the attack on the U.S. Mission in Benghazi was perpetrated by terrorists.
Funny, we were originally told it was a YouTube video. At least, that's what Obama had Susan Rice come out and tell us and the world.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fier...oblem-with-me/

Quote:
He continued, “If Senator McCain and Senator Graham and others want to go after somebody, they should go after me. And I’m happy to have that discussion with them. But for them to go after the U.N. ambassador, who had nothing to do with Benghazi and was simply doing a presentation based on information she had received, and to besmirch her reputation is outrageous.”
If she didn't have anything to do with Benghazi, wtf did Obama decide she was the one who needed to go onto the national stage to talk about it?
__________________
Much of modern liberalism consists of people trying to get revenge on the football players to whom they felt inferior in school.
CorvusCamenarum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 08:36 PM   #87
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
http://freebeacon.com/petraeus-knew-...nghazi-attack/



Funny, we were originally told it was a YouTube video. At least, that's what Obama had Susan Rice come out and tell us and the world.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/fier...oblem-with-me/



If she didn't have anything to do with Benghazi, wtf did Obama decide she was the one who needed to go onto the national stage to talk about it?

The Blaze and The Free Beacon? Stellar, unbiased "journalism" there. Maybe we should have them look into the location of those "weapons of mass destruction". I'm sure someone will find them eventually....
Moyank24 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 08:38 PM   #88
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
The Blaze and The Free Beacon? Stellar, unbiased "journalism" there. Maybe we should have them look into the location of those "weapons of mass destruction". I'm sure someone will find them eventually....
The CNN article :

http://security.blogs.cnn.com/2012/1...ess/?hpt=hp_t1

All those other reports got disproved over time,” the source says Petraeus told him.


This didn't happen overnight.
__________________
Throw us one Russell---John Fox Super Bowl 48
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 10:40 PM   #89
CorvusCamenarum
macrumors 65816
 
CorvusCamenarum's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Birmingham, AL
Quote:
Originally Posted by Moyank24 View Post
The Blaze and The Free Beacon? Stellar, unbiased "journalism" there. Maybe we should have them look into the location of those "weapons of mass destruction". I'm sure someone will find them eventually....
...and WMD has what to do with the discussion at hand? That's what I thought. Feel free to prove the sources wrong, or maybe advance the discussion forward when you're done.
__________________
Much of modern liberalism consists of people trying to get revenge on the football players to whom they felt inferior in school.
CorvusCamenarum is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 15, 2012, 10:59 PM   #90
citizenzen
macrumors 65816
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
Feel free to prove the sources wrong ...
Feel free to provide sources that aren't blatantly partisan.

I'm not going to bother proving your sources wrong.

I'm frankly not going to give your sources a minute of my attention.

My loss, no doubt.

citizenzen is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 07:05 AM   #91
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Happy to see a few sane Republicans with different views than the angry, old man (McCain) and his little bitch, Lindsey Graham (hey, he needs something to run for re-election on given his recent comments on immigration). Hell, even Lieberman is distancing himself from his butt buddies.

McCain is a joke. He was holding a press conference rather than attending the intelligence briefing where he might learn a fact or two. But no, he'd rather embarass himself by refusing to answer questions and showing us that we made the right chouice in not electing him in 2008. How sad this man has become.
rdowns is offline   2 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 10:01 AM   #92
Moyank24
macrumors 68040
 
Moyank24's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: in a New York State of mind
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
...and WMD has what to do with the discussion at hand? That's what I thought. Feel free to prove the sources wrong, or maybe advance the discussion forward when you're done.
My point was that you are using blatant right-wing paranoid conservative blogs to back up what you are saying. They are biased and they have obviously latched onto something and aren't letting it go. They don't care about the truth, they only care about getting those like you to believe it.

I wonder if a Republican President was in the same situation would they be using the same tactics to poison their followers?

Do you realize how many lives have been lost in the last 11 years? How in the world can the country with the "strongest military" allow a plane to crash into the Pentagon - which, you know, is the center of the Military. Shall we dig up some Bush conspiracy theory? Or how about the numerous cover-ups of friendly fire deaths (the most blatant being Pat Tilman)? And forget about the non-existent WMD that were used as justification for war.

The fact that blogs these blogs and sites are using these 4 Americans to spread paranoia and attract clicks is pathetic. Why ignore the thousands who have lost their lives during this thing? Over the course of the last 11 years I imagine things could have been done better, or differently, or more efficiently to save lives. Blame Clinton. Blame Bush. Blame Obama. But let's not pretend it's anything more than it is.
Moyank24 is offline   3 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 10:44 AM   #93
63dot
macrumors 601
 
63dot's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Platte
The GOP just lost an election and this "scandal" is all they can hang their hat on until something more promising comes up. Just like when Obama took 2008, it was interesting to see all the 9/11 conspiracy theories die down. That knife cuts both ways.

What is likely to happen is that for a short time when the scandal does not come to fruition, the instigators like McCain will temporarily look like idiots but then everyone will move on. It's politics as usual here.

Last edited by 63dot; Nov 16, 2012 at 11:51 AM.
63dot is offline   1 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 11:38 AM   #94
MacNut
macrumors P6
 
MacNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
So Rice's early talking point was this is the youtube video, but Petraeus is saying I knew it was a terrorist attack the whole time, where is the communication breakdown?
MacNut is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 12:06 PM   #95
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacNut View Post
So Rice's early talking point was this is the youtube video, but Petraeus is saying I knew it was a terrorist attack the whole time, where is the communication breakdown?
Petraeus "knew" it was a terrorist attack but hadn't yet decided it was. He also said it might have been from the video. It took days to come to a conclusion. In the meantime it was thought to be from the video.
__________________
Throw us one Russell---John Fox Super Bowl 48
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 12:09 PM   #96
MacNut
macrumors P6
 
MacNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peace View Post
Petraeus "knew" it was a terrorist attack but hadn't yet decided it was. He also said it might have been from the video. It took days to come to a conclusion. In the meantime it was thought to be from the video.
If they hadn't made any conclusions why say anything?
MacNut is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 12:11 PM   #97
rdowns
macrumors Penryn
 
rdowns's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacNut View Post
So Rice's early talking point was this is the youtube video, but Petraeus is saying I knew it was a terrorist attack the whole time, where is the communication breakdown?

But...but...Benghazi


Quote:
Rep. Peter King (R-NY) has admitted that the CIA and intelligence community approved U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice’s talking points before she made her much-derided Sept. 16 appearance on several Sunday news shows to discuss the attacks in Benghazi. King, one of the most outspoken critics of the Obama administration’s response to the attack, came to his conclusion following testimony from former CIA Director David Petraeus.


After leaving the closed-door hearing, King spoke with reporters for several minutes about Petraeus’ statements. Rice’s television appearances were among the topics discussed, leading King to indicate that while Petraeus did not personally write Rice’s talking points, the CIA did approve them:
Q: Did he say why it was taken out of the talking points that [the attack] was Al Qaeda affiliated?
KING: He didn’t know.
Q: He didn’t know? What do you mean he didn’t know?
KING: They were not involved — it was done, the process was completed and they said, “Ok go with those talking points.” Again it’s interagency — I got the impression that 7, 8, 9 different agencies.
Q: Did he give you the impression that he was upset it was taken out?
KING: No.
Q: You said the CIA said “OK” to the revised report –
KING: No, well, they said in that, after it goes through the process, they OK’d it to go. Yeah, they said “Okay for it to go.”

rdowns is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 12:17 PM   #98
Peace
macrumors P6
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Space--The ONLY Frontier
Quote:
Originally Posted by MacNut View Post
If they hadn't made any conclusions why say anything?
It took days for Petraeus to come to a conclusion .

Not the intelligence community.
__________________
Throw us one Russell---John Fox Super Bowl 48
Peace is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 12:22 PM   #99
MacNut
macrumors P6
 
MacNut's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: CT
Quote:
Originally Posted by rdowns View Post
But...but...Benghazi



[/INDENT]
What good did it do to blame the video when they did not have evidence either way to prove or disprove that was the source. What is wrong with just saying we don't know what caused the attack?
MacNut is offline   0 Reply With Quote
Old Nov 16, 2012, 02:07 PM   #100
hulugu
macrumors 68000
 
hulugu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: the faraway towns
Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
As put forth by Senator Graham, the $64,000 question is: if the CIA were running the Benghazi show as we've been told, and were in charge of security, then why was the ambassador asking for extra security from...the State Department? It's reasonable to assume that if the CIA had charge of security, the ambassador would know this and know where to properly direct his requests.
Chain of command.

Quote:
Originally Posted by CorvusCamenarum View Post
...Funny, we were originally told it was a YouTube video. At least, that's what Obama had Susan Rice come out and tell us and the world...
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!
__________________
I look like a soldier; I feel like a thief
hulugu is offline   1 Reply With Quote


Reply
MacRumors Forums > Mac Community > Community Discussion > Politics, Religion, Social Issues

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Similar Threads
thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Co Senator facing possible recall resigns stubeeef Politics, Religion, Social Issues 20 Dec 4, 2013 08:36 AM
IL GOP County Chairman resigns over email mcrain Politics, Religion, Social Issues 31 Jun 26, 2013 11:12 AM
Pope Resigns rdowns Politics, Religion, Social Issues 72 Feb 19, 2013 02:02 PM
Dinesh D'Souza resigns jnpy!$4g3cwk Politics, Religion, Social Issues 1 Oct 19, 2012 06:00 AM
Bishop gets caught having relationship with an Adult. Resigns. niuniu Politics, Religion, Social Issues 32 Jul 1, 2012 11:18 PM

Forum Jump

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 05:29 AM.

Mac Rumors | Mac | iPhone | iPhone Game Reviews | iPhone Apps

Mobile Version | Fixed | Fluid | Fluid HD
Copyright 2002-2013, MacRumors.com, LLC