Hogwash, hundreds of people would have known for more than a year. He was the commander in chief in Afghanistan forcrissakes, and he spent a lot of time with Paula, likely at night after his regular duties, he went regularly on 5 km runs with her, while his wife and her husband were back in Virginia. Americans are not only puritans, but also naive.
CIA Director Petraeus Resigns, Citing an Affair
- Thread starter Kyra.Graves
- Start date
You knew about this for the past year?
So which one are you going with: that those who conducted the national background check where utterly incompetent? Or that this honking huge red flag was considered not to be a risk because the affair was over. If it was the later, why a week before he was supposed to testify before Congress (and he can still be subpoenaed to do so) does he fall on his sword regarding the affair?
Indeed.
Too bad about the affair ... All In ? Now All Out.
Disgraced former CIA Director David Petraeus exchanged a sexually explicit email about having sex under a desk with his mistress and continued to pursue her by bombarding her with thousands of messages even after she had broken off the affair it has been revealed.
The racy communications between the married four-star general and his lover, Paula Broadwell, were uncovered when the FBI began an investigation after they suspected corruption between the pair.
Instead the FBI found evidence of a potentially compromising affair for America's top intelligence official which would have been a breach of national security requirements and led to Petraeus' dramatic resignation yesterday.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/art...-Petraeus-resigns-head-CIA.html#ixzz2BpwDEbwT
She looks fine. Too bad.
Too many posts to read them all. I think that marital fidelity is a condition of employment in the U.S. military. So, you cheat on your spouse you should resign. I think this policy applies to gay marriages as well (or maybe not).
I'm all for you posting, but when you just post a link and walk away, it indicates that you are advertising. Many many SPs post one thing or another in the Lounge because they know that there is far more traffic here than there is elsewhere on TERB. Usually it's just a thread title and a link and nothing more. (As you pretty much did.) I've seen them post things asking the boys about their preferences about 1 thing or another, then they never reappear. It's obvious to me what they are doing. I suppose it's a free world and any SP can feel free to post some thread or another in the lounge; however, what I find amusing is how serious the TERB crowd takes these threads when it is clear that the SP who started the thread really couldn't give a toss.
Feel free to post anything you like, but have something to say from the get go and then you would not be advertising (or at least I wouldn't have suspected you of having ulterior motives.
... And I think if you had posted something like this in your initial post, jtk probably wouldn't have jumped all over you (and not in the good way - lol!)
Have to disagree with you on the 'no big deal' stance. In a position like CIA Director, you are literally talking about life or death for thousands of people. It IS a matter of national security and the potential for blackmail, innocuous pillow talk or potentially leaving files around (see: Maxime Bernier) is very real and has very serious implications. Just my (not-so) humble opinion...
If you get the opportunity to spend time with Kyra it does not take much time to notice she is very and I mean very bright. Excellent business mind!!!
I agree with James a 100%, it was a pretty lame attempt and the story sorry to say is of the least of importance.
Nonetheless there will be people who will book her because of this thread, she came back with a spirited defense but we all know why sp's post in the lounge for and i appreciate the fact that James had the balls to speak up about it.
Nonetheless there will be people who will book her because of this thread, she came back with a spirited defense but we all know why sp's post in the lounge for and i appreciate the fact that James had the balls to speak up about it.
The title of the biography she wrote of him is called "All In". How fucking awesome is that??!
Seriously, though.. an affair is an intrinsic national security risk for anyone in his position. Would he be under pressure to do anything that he should not and would not do otherwise (ie. blackmail)? Possibly. Would his mind be fully focused on his job when need be? Possibly not.
Finally, I do think some SPs post in the lounge just for the purpose of advertising. I don't believe that is the case here.
Seriously, though.. an affair is an intrinsic national security risk for anyone in his position. Would he be under pressure to do anything that he should not and would not do otherwise (ie. blackmail)? Possibly. Would his mind be fully focused on his job when need be? Possibly not.
Finally, I do think some SPs post in the lounge just for the purpose of advertising. I don't believe that is the case here.
On the contrary, I rarely if ever enter the cesspool that is the Politics Forum on this board.
I didn't know about the situation until I read it here.
Thank you Kyra.
they are public figures, public figures don't get a personal life. everything they do gets put in the media. it shows he can't be trusted for one thing.
Bernier gave confidential documents to his Hells Angels girlfriend. Having an affair with an underworld figure is different than having an ordinary affair.
Were JFK's many affairs national security issues? When did the US become so puritanical?
Were JFK's many affairs national security issues? When did the US become so puritanical?
Bernier didn't "give" her the confidential documents, he left the NATO papers at Julie Couillard's place because he was stupid and forgetful (and pussy-stupified.)
You obviously won't bother to read or give credence to other posters' opinions, but many have made the point in this thread and the one in the Politics forum that even if Petraeus and Broadwell were simply having an affair, that fact (and the fact that she was probably not being monitored the way his family, etc., would be) could be leveraged by terrorists, foreign interests, hell, even business interests to compromise US (and global) security. It doesn't matter is she had connections to criminals or not - bad guys find ways of exploiting circumstances like this.
The 'fact' that he allegedly kept harrassing her after she supposedly ended things means that he had fallen for her, which in turn would have made him more susceptible to blackmail (either in the traditional form or by more insidious means like kidnapping, threats of violence, etc.) and thus putting thousands, if not millions of people at risk.
And yes, JFK's affairs were national security issues. This is not a question of being puritanically conservative as it is about not putting oneself in a potentially compromising (and catastrophic) position while fulfilling positions of incredible importance, secrecy, security, etc. Keep your dick (or vagina) in your pants until you have finished serving your country in such a vital capacity...
