The tangled web 15

It is certain* that General David Petraeus, as head of the CIA, lied to the nation about the armed attack on the US mission in Benghazi, Libya, which resulted in the death of Ambassador Stevens and three other Americans on 9/11/12. General Petraeus has now resigned, citing an adulterous love affair – not participation in a cover-up – as a moral lapse so grievous that it renders him unfit for high office.

In our judgment – and we are always and insistently judgmental – lying to the nation is a far worse moral offense than adultery. We would like to think that General Petraeus is of the same opinion.

The Obama administration has woven a tangled web of lies about the military defeat of the United States by Arab Muslims in Libya. Now they are desperately trying to cover up not only the truth but the lies as well. Ever more tangled the web becomes. So far, two Generals and an Admiral, all men of distinction and honor (see our posts Yet more about Benghazi – but still not enough, October 31, 2012, and Admiral fired in storm over Benghazigate?, October 31, 2012), have been entangled in it and brought down. Will the incredible luck that has sustained Obama throughout his political life keep him yet again from the disgrace he deserves?

We found that our suspicions about what might be the far more scandalous truth behind General Petraeus’s resignation are shared by Paul A. Rahe, who writes at his website Ricochet:

Here is what I wonder. Did David Petraeus allow himself to be blackmailed by the minions of Barack Obama?

The testimony Petraeus gave Congress on Benghazi shortly after the assassination of our ambassador to Libya was a restatement of the patently false narrative foisted on the country by Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton, and their underlings — to wit, that the assault on the American consulate was a spontaneous demonstration in reaction to [an anti-Islam] Youtube video.

Petraeus had to know better. The Benghazi bungle took place on the anniversary of 9/11. There was plenty of intelligence available to Petraeus prior to the event suggesting that Al Qaeda was becoming a real force in the region, and the e-mails that the CIA sent the White House at the time indicate that the folks in the agency knew within hours that the attack had been carefully planned and knew who in Benghazi was responsible.

So why did a man always known for his honor and integrity go before a Congressional committee and lie through his teeth? If Washington were Chicago, we would know the answer. Blackmail is, in Chicago, standard operating procedure. Is Washington now Chicago? Is Petraeus leaving office a disgraced and broken man because one act of dishonor and betrayal led him to commit another far more shameful?

I hope not. I greatly admire the man. … But I, nonetheless, have to ask, “Why did Petraeus lie?” And given the fact that the lie was part of a preposterous narrative being peddled by a President who knew that the truth might well be fatal to his reelection — and who depended on his lies being echoed by a pliable, servile press — I have to ask, “How did they get an honorable man to disgrace himself so utterly?”

If this line of questioning makes sense, then we have to entertain the possibility that David Petraeus is resigning because doing what he did in his testimony to Congress is distasteful in a fashion that a man of his mettle cannot long bear.

Congress should not let this pass. David Petraeus should be made to testify about Barack’s Benghazi Bungle. We have a right to know the truth. We had a right to know it well before the 6th of November. We now have a right to know why we were denied the truth.

Let’s conjecture that the Obama gang feared that the General would tell the truth when called to testify before Congressional inquiries next week. Obviously the head of the CIA is an indispensable  witness when a CIA mission was one of the targets in Benghazi and two of its men were killed. “So,” think the stoats and weasels in the White House, “let’s quickly get rid of the man who might reveal all that we’re trying to cover up – our incompetence, our callousness, our weakness, our bad judgment, our illicit dealings, our treachery – and stick another man in who will lie for us. Now on what grounds can we demand General Petraeus’s resignation? Well, there’s that love affair we know of. We’ll get him to say he’s so overcome by remorse for that he feels he must ask to be let go.”

Why does the General agree to do it? It’s another lie, even though the fact of the affair (finished some time ago) is true.  Let’s say he goes along with the new deception in order to be free to tell the truth. But will he tell the truth now as a private citizen? According to some media reports he will not be testifying before the closed-door Democrat-dominated Senate Intelligence Committee next week; the new conniving head of the CIA will be doing so in his stead.

But it is a different story with the Republican-dominated House whose inquiry into the Benghazi affair starts on Thursday. CNN reports:

Homeland Security Committee chairman Rep. Peter King, who is also a member of the House Permanent Select Committee on Intelligence, has been a vocal critic of the Obama administration’s handling of the September 11, 2012, attacks in Libya that killed four Americans including diplomat Chris Stevens. …

King said … that Petraeus is “an absolutely essential witness, maybe more than anybody else.”

“David Petraeus testifying has nothing to do with whether or not he’s still the CIA director, and I don’t see how the CIA can say he’s not going to testify,” King said. “I think his testimony is … certainly necessary … He was at the center of this and he has answers that only he has.”

If Petraeus does not testify as originally scheduled on Thursday, King said, “It should be very soon after that.”

When he does, if he tells the truth regardless of the consequences to the Obama administration or his own reputation, he will go a long way towards redeeming that reputation. If he shirks it, or endorses the administration’s lies yet again – great general though he is and deserving of all honor for his exceptional service to his country – his good name will be tarnished beyond redemption.

*

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who glibly stated that she “accepted responsibility” for what happened in Benghazi, is reported to have “turned down an invitation to testify before the House Foreign Affairs Committee next Thursday on the Benghazi attack”.

Note added 11/13/12. Go here to see what she will be doing that she considers more important than attending the inquiry into Benghazigate.

*

*We were wrong. There is no certainty about this. See the comment below by Loretta Landrum Richey 11/13/12.

If you enjoyed this post, make sure you subscribe to my RSS feed!
  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100000819481551 Loretta Landrum Richey

    If I got everything right, Sept 14 was a closed hearing so we do not have video or transcript of the testimony by Petraeus. There were implications that he did say it was a video, However, the chairman of the committee in an interview that day said that the information from testimony indicated that it was NOT a protest against the video and it was likely that the terrorists had connections to Al Qaeda. That does not sound to me like Petraeus had testified that it was a protest against the video.

    http://intelligence.house.gov/video/chairman-rogers-discusses-attacks-us-personnel-and-property-egypt-and-libya

    Also, in a Newt Gingrich interview Fox and Friends: “Gingrich said this was the first time he’s realized that “this has been going on for months,” later adding that he’d been told “by people in the room” that Petraeus had in fact been “the one guy” who said the Benghazi attack was an act of terrorism and not a protest to a video.”

    http://www.mediaite.com/tv/newt-gingrich-im-shocked-by-the-methodical-dishonesty-since-benghazi-attack/

    It looks to me that there has been a coordinated attack on Petraeus to try to discredit his testimony.

    • liz

      Yes, it looks like their usual tactic of character assassination, which only provides further proof of their own guilt. They are really desperate to shut these guys up.
      The clueless Obama voters are probably not even curious as to why all this so coincidentally happened right before hearings on Benghazi. They will obediently follow their programming and label the evil military as scumbags and Obama as the pure innocent victim of their manipulations.

    • Jillian Becker

      Thank you for the links, Loretta.

      The Gingrich one is particularly interesting.

      So we don’t know for sure what Petraeus said about Benghazi in that closed session a few days after the event. He may have been falsely reported as having blamed the video.

      I share your suspicion that a coordinated attack has been mounted against him to discredit his testimony.

    • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

      Good comments. It is starting to appear that the purpose is in fact to discredit any potential Petraeus testimony. If so, I don’t think it is going to work. Petraeus has way to much credibility built up over the years. That does not simply get washed away because the man had affairs. To extrapolate that because a man had an affair (which is bad judgement if you get caught), that his judgement or veracity is suspect in other area’s is simply nonsense. I have to think that now it is all out, Petraeus impulse would be to want to get “everything” out. Especially if, as Loretta suggests, Petraeus is being thrown under the bus by Obama.

  • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

    Seems out of nowhere there is an epidemic of “improper relationships” causing high profile people to “step down”:

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/entertainment-arts-20300270

    It seems Romney should have sited “Elmo” rather than “Big Bird”

  • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

    Sorry for an “off topic” Jillian, but here is an article I HIGHLY RECOMMEND. It is fairly well researched, but what is most interesting is toward the end of the article where the author discusses US weapons technology. He does so with plenty of instances of the various usage, as well as hyper-links to DARPA where each piece of weaponry is described.

    http://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2012/11/201211912435170883.html

    • Jillian Becker

      Steve, the article and the video are published by Aljazeera, the foremost propaganda organ of Islam. The article is written by a rabid America-hater.

      Robotics is fascinating technology. That the wars of the future will be fought by robots rather than people should be welcome news. (I loved the little shuffling robot soccer players who kept falling over!)

      The writer, Alfred W McCoy, is torn between wanting to accuse the US of becoming much too militarily powerful (ironic since Obama is doing everything he can to weaken this country) and wanting it to fail in its wicked ambitions to dominate the world, gloat, gloat. His dilemma is summed up in his last sentence.

      However, both the video and the article deliver some good news – that the enemy is scared of our marvelous and ever-advancing technology.

      The giveaway of who the propagandists are and where they’re coming from emerges towards the end of the video when the man says that capitalism has to be overcome if there is to be an end to wars. Yeah, yeah. And the lady “futurist” comes out with the old Soviet Cold War “Peace” message to the effect that all the ingenuity, effort and resources should be invested in nicer things than weapons of war. Like promoting Islam? World government? Green energy? Love? Anyway, so that the US and Israel can be attacked the old-fashioned way.

      • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

        Yes, ignore all the political stuff he threw in. I simply thought he did a good job of collecting together interesting information, Also I find perusing the Middle Eastern newspapers valuable for testing the winds there so-to-speak, seeing what they are seeing, and how they are interpreting it “know thy enemy”.

        Also you will find in papers like the “Jordan Times”, Things and events that will not make the US news. They certainly see things through their own lens, but their own lens is right “there” on the ground and not being filtered through the liberal western media. Read a lot of Middle Eastern Newspapers which after all are sponsored by an array of local power interests that are at odds with each other. By extrapolating between claims and counter claims, one can start to build a general picture. Thats what I do in the market. Take in as much information (much of which is BS) as I can, then look for patterns… why I bought heavy into AMBS when it was still at .007 and will hang on till it reaches 1.00 early next year… then take take extended sabbatical to Costa Rica.

        I actually am pretty jazzed about the new technology, that’s the main reason I posted the leak… to demonstrate the concern it is creating abroad. This concern makes me very happy, scare the peasants into thinking twice, this is what we preach. Why should a far more advanced civilization slog it out on the level of a much less advanced one.

        … they like Asymmetrical Warfare, lets give them Asymmetrical Warfare on “our” terms.

        Really Jillian, you thought I was being being persuaded to his personal viewpoints? I thought I had “at least” built up more cred than that!!
        luv ya;-)

        • Jillian Becker

          Forgive me, Steve, for drawing attention to the source – and therefore the bias – of the article and video you sent us the links to.

          What was uppermost in my mind was to warn readers who may decide to use the links, what to expect.

          I applaud your delving into what the enemy says. We do it constantly too. (MEMRI is a great service – they pick out and translate important items from all Arabic media. Do you know about them?)

          Please continue to tell us about the always interesting information and opinions that you find. We very much appreciate it. Your contributions are an asset to our site.

          • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

            Thank you for that, you obviously are a little more responsible for misperceptions since this is your blog, and I failed to take that into account. Of course it makes sense, and feel free to clarify for me if I my writing should fall into ambiguity… say when I have had a few beers… its three in the morning… etc. lol

            The best information I gave you is AMBS Amerantus Biosciences. I researched the hell out of it and it looks very good for breakthru treatment for Parkinsons. Management missteps allowed Short sellers to drive the price into the ground. But it had nothing to do with the science.

            This is still one of the most undervalued stocks and IMO will multiply 20 times at least over next several months. If it does, I will be sitting on over 1 million dollars worth of stock. Highly recommend my friends on this page look into it and weigh respective risk aversement…

            also look at IMSC. They are going to get final TSA approval before end of year, and have best product in its class. it will get fat government contracts, and its price will at least triple. As always tho you must do own homework, and evaluation… that said, I am going to have a very good year;-)

  • http://www.facebook.com/steve.m.cardon Steve M Cardon

    IMO if Petraeus does testify, and i think he will, I believe he will tell the truth… I hope some Republicans are keeping a close eye on him so he doesn’t “commit suicide” over an extramarital affair… there have been enough mysterious terminations already.

    • liz

      I’m beginning to suspect that they were already looking for something to pin on Petraus as an excuse to get his resignation, so that they could then replace him with this other guy who will testify in his place, and continue to lie for them.
      If he was in their camp they would have overlooked the whole affair, of course. And you’re right, someone better be guarding him from sudden fatal “remorse” till after he testifies, which I hope is very soon.