Go Back   Movie Fan Central Discussion Forums > Hobby Talk! > Politics
MOVIE FAN CENTRAL FAQ Members List Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

 
 
Thread Tools Rate Thread Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-09-2012, 05:07 PM
CIA Director Resigns, Cites Death of "Thousands of Innocent Children" By Drones

Quote:
CIA Director David Petraeus resigned Friday, citing the results of an authoritative joint study by Stanford and New York Universities that found 49 out of every 50 people killed in the CIA-run drone program are innocent civilians and his "extremely poor judgment" in implementing the program.

As first reported by NBC News, Petraeus disclosed the murders in a letter released to the CIA work force on Friday afternoon, writing: "Such behavior is unacceptable, both as a human and as the leader of an organization such as ours."

Petraeus told President Barack Obama of the deaths of thousands of innocent people, especially children, he was responsible for and offered his resignation during a meeting Thursday, a senior official told NBC News.

In a statement, Obama said he accepted Petraeus’s resignation on Fri--
Lol, jk, he had to resign 'cause he was fucking some lady that wasn't his wife which is so very scandalous and inappropriate.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...al-affair?lite
  #2  
Old 11-09-2012, 11:49 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
Lol, jk, he had to resign 'cause he was fucking some lady that wasn't his wife which is so very scandalous and inappropriate.

http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012...al-affair?lite

Aaaaaaaand it turns out that "some lady" is the co-author of his book "All In", Paula Broadwell, who is also married with two kids. (facepalm)

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/we...aula-broadwell

http://gawker.com/5959347/and-the-re...&post=54158246

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slate...iographer.html
  #3  
Old 11-10-2012, 01:41 AM
We have been watching his career with great interest.
  #4  
Old 11-10-2012, 03:02 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Aaaaaaaand it turns out that "some lady" is the co-author of his book "All In", Paula Broadwell, who is also married with two kids. (facepalm)
Dear God, that is truly shocking and deplorable. I can't believe that someone who knowingly orders the wanton slaughter of innocent people as a matter of daily routine would stoop to such a low of being a homewrecker.

I only hope they can find a more respectable family man, a churchgoer who can keep his dick in his pants, to replace him as Chief Executioner of Poor Villagers, Funeral Attendees, and Good Samaritans.
  #5  
Old 11-10-2012, 12:39 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
Dear God, that is truly shocking and deplorable. I can't believe that someone who knowingly orders the wanton slaughter of innocent people as a matter of daily routine would stoop to such a low of being a homewrecker.

I only hope they can find a more respectable family man, a churchgoer who can keep his dick in his pants, to replace him as Chief Executioner of Poor Villagers, Funeral Attendees, and Good Samaritans.
Sorry Quent, but I'm having some trouble understanding your zany leftist logic. Are you suggesting the Federal Government shouldn't be allowed to reign extrajudicial death from the sky? I'm sorry, but I think we have a little something called the constitution, economics, small business owners, America, and FREEDOM. But whatever, while yours is an obviously asinine position, now that you have your Marxist friend in the white house to do zany Marxist things like give free money exclusively to the Marxist financial companies like Goldman Sachs, you have nothing to worry about, he'll definitely end and not expand the program.
  #6  
Old 11-10-2012, 01:25 PM
News: country with massive war machine uses its massive war machine
  #7  
Old 11-10-2012, 02:18 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by QUENTIN View Post
Dear God, that is truly shocking and deplorable. I can't believe that someone who knowingly orders the wanton slaughter of innocent people as a matter of daily routine would stoop to such a low of being a homewrecker.

I only hope they can find a more respectable family man, a churchgoer who can keep his dick in his pants, to replace him as Chief Executioner of Poor Villagers, Funeral Attendees, and Good Samaritans.

See that's the problem, CIA director is not an elected position. He could be fucking animals in his spare time and it wouldn't matter a tiddely-twat what the American people thought. Why would he feel the need to resign? I can understand getting ahead of the story and letting people know in advance, but resign?
  #8  
Old 11-10-2012, 03:34 PM
Quentin do you know where in the report The Daily Mail is getting that 1/50 number from?
  #9  
Old 11-11-2012, 11:22 AM
I don't know why someone has to resign, because of a private affair. Did any of this have anything to do with his job?
  #10  
Old 11-11-2012, 03:17 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
I don't know why someone has to resign, because of a private affair. Did any of this have anything to do with his job?
Well in general a high ranking official being involved in an affair leaves them vulnerable to blackmail, so that's not good.

In this case, the FBI was doing an investigation involving some security email leaks(?) and were investigating all gov email which was apparently how Patreaus was communicating with Broadwell (dumb). The affair seemed to have ended month ago, but there's been no mention that any of the leaks stemmed from Patreaus' emails.
  #11  
Old 11-11-2012, 08:16 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by electriclite View Post
Well in general a high ranking official being involved in an affair leaves them vulnerable to blackmail, so that's not good.

In this case, the FBI was doing an investigation involving some security email leaks(?) and were investigating all gov email which was apparently how Patreaus was communicating with Broadwell (dumb). The affair seemed to have ended month ago, but there's been no mention that any of the leaks stemmed from Patreaus' emails.
The first part has little to do with the second. Cheating on your wife has nothing to do with security leaks. They are separate issues. Cheating did not seem to hinder the work Kennedy was doing at the time.
  #12  
Old 11-11-2012, 08:23 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by Erroneous View Post
The first part has little to do with the second. Cheating on your wife has nothing to do with security leaks. They are separate issues. Cheating did not seem to hinder the work Kennedy was doing at the time.
Just because Kennedy didn't get balckmailed doesn't mean he didn't leave himself open to it... remember for a little while him and a mafia boss were fucking the same chick. Not exactly a risk-averse scenario.

Washington Post

Quote:
" The Washington Post fills in some more details on what led to Petraeus's Spyfall, and it looks like it's getting a little Fatal Attraction-y up in here.

What we knew: the FBI got involved because someone, presumably Broadwell, had "sought access to [Petraeus's] email" account, and the bureau was worried that he had been hacked, or otherwise compromised. This is a big ol' problem, because I can think of lots of rogue states that would love to poke around through the CIA Director's Gmail.

What we know now: the investigation initially had nothing to do with Petraeus, but was rather a routine harassment investigation. Broadwell had been sending abusive emails to another woman, one she considered a romantic rival for Petraeus's affections, and she had done it from Petraeus's account. From there, the FBI went through his emails, and discovered the affair."

(facepalm)

Last edited by electriclite; 11-11-2012 at 08:28 PM..
  #13  
Old 11-14-2012, 07:12 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguy View Post
Quentin do you know where in the report The Daily Mail is getting that 1/50 number from?


The quoted source was "its ass".
  #14  
Old 11-14-2012, 11:32 PM
Quote:
Originally Posted by someguy View Post
News: country with massive war machine uses its massive war machine
Eh, we're all used to that, but I find it particularly egregious and humorous when they pretend to moral outrage, particularly over something like consensual adults fucking.

Quote:
Originally Posted by someguy View Post
Quentin do you know where in the report The Daily Mail is getting that 1/50 number from?
The Guardian, NY Times, etc. also reported that number, just to be clear it's the conclusion of the report rather than a conclusion The Daily Mail is drawing from the report.

The numbers section starts on page 43 and the explanation of the methodology is briefly summarized in that section then expanded upon throughout. They're relying on a combination of firsthand accounts of survivors and witnesses, official US statements, and the existing chronicle of drone strikes and casualties conducted by The Bureau of Investigative Journalism, New America Foundation, and Long War Journal. A breakdown of every reported drone strike and its minimum casualties over the last three years is also in the appendix. The 1 in 50 figure comes from the total official casualties in Pakistan since 2008 which is just over 2600 and the 49 "militant leaders" or other "high value" individuals who were intended targets killed during that same time period. It draws a distinction between confirmed militants who the U.S. is knowingly trying to execute and all the people inadvertently killed who the Administration has adopted the habit of then claiming to be militants. (I assume you know this but any male over 16 killed by a drone is claimed to be a militant). Only 13% of all drone strikes hit an intended, planned target and those intended targets make up a little less than 2% of all casualties so "collateral damage" makes up the rest.

http://livingunderdrones.org/wp-cont...DER-DRONES.pdf

Last edited by QUENTIN; 11-14-2012 at 11:36 PM..
  #15  
Old 11-15-2012, 12:26 AM
I'm well aware about Obama's drone bullshit, I was just having a hard time getting that number out of the report. The only example I found from (briefly) going through the analysis was a figure citing 2% of deaths since 2004 being 'high value' individuals. My only issue with that is the blanket assumption that the other 98% are innocent civilians when the reality of the situation is a hell of a lot murkier. It's too sensationalistic and reminds me of the government's blanket assumption with regards to classifying militants.

I do feel that if enough people speak out on the drone issue it might make Obama reconsider what he's doing. Call me overly optimistic on that one but he's never struck me as having the same arrogance of the Bush administration, and even though he's gone farther right than them in this area I think it's mainly because he's been able to get away with it. His reversal on same sex marriage is something I didn't expect from him, and gives me some hope that if enough people whined he's listen.

As for the war machine thing, that wasn`t anything bad, just me pointing out it's business as usual.

Edit: Oh yeah, what makes me more livid than the drone shit itself is liberals falling all over themselves to defend Obama on this when they'd be calling for Bush's head over the exact same thing. Case in point: http://www.theatlantic.com/internati...kistan/262862/

Last edited by someguy; 11-15-2012 at 12:29 AM..
 

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump