Real Story behind CIA Director, General Petraeus’s Resignation.

This month saw the re-election of Barack Obama to White House and the resignation of decorated  and once highly acclaimed US General, David Petraeus, as the Director of World’s foremost clandestine operations agency, CIA. Petraeus had to resign as his affair with Paula Broadwell became public. Mainstream media in USA and elsewhere went to town with lurid details of general’s peccadilloes. All Voices said, ^^The worlds’ mightiest military once led by now out-going CIA Director David Petraeus was in shock after the General admitted to an extramarital affair, as reported by Fox News. Further research course of an FBI investigation revealed David Patraeus mistress name as Paula Broadwell, his biographer that wrote the book All In: The Education of General David Petraeus.^^. 
Watch the latest video at
While Media and her audience were gripped by titillating voyeurism, few paid attention to many jarring false notes in the *official story* that played out.
  1. Paula Broadwell’s dalliance with David Petraeus was touted as threat to National Security. Obviously, Petraeus was not the national threat. Therefore, Broadwell was. Broadwell is a Major in the US reserve army. She was allowed exclusive access to Petraeus when he was  in Iraq and Afghanistan, and later in CIA for writing his biography, which was published as All In: The Education of General David Petraeus. Broadwell wouldn’t have enjoyed this privilege had she not been cleared both by CIA and FBI on grounds of security and trustworthiness. If she has an affair with the general, how can she or he or both suddenly become a national security risk?
  2.  Secondly, how come a lower functionary of FBI, stationed in far away Florida, FBI special agent Frederick Humphries, came to investigate the director of CIA? Story goes that a Tampa socialite, Jill Kelley, complained to him about threatening emails she received from Paula Broadwell. Even if true, did he inform his bosses when he realised that CIA director was involved? Such protocols are always established and in place in any government organization the world over.
  3. Jill Kelly also sent emails to Gen. John Allen, her friend and the top U.S. commander in Afghanistan. Allen to has got in trouble over those emails and is subject of an investigation. If anybody was a security risk, the suspicions should have narrowed down on socialite Jill Kelly. Was Kelly investigated?
  4. It had come to light that agent Humphries had shared his shirtless pictures with Jill Kelly. It was rumoured he was removed from the investigation when this became known. But his lawyer defended him by saying, ^^That picture was sent years before Mrs Kelley contacted him about this…It was sent as part of a larger context of what I would call social relations in which the families would exchange numerous photos of each other….described the picture as “a joke” depicting Mr Humphries posing with dummies^^. Clearly the agent was part of the social circle of socialite Jill Kelly. Did he have access to both the generals in the past? Had he had any axe to grind? Did someone else get him to nail both the generals? Could he have blackmailed Jill Kelly to collaborate? 
  5. The New York Times report quotes what Humphries unnamed colleagues said about him, ^^relentless in his pursuit of what he sees as wrongdoing, which appears to describe his role in the F.B.I. investigation involving Mr. Petraeus. Suspecting that the case involved serious security issues and was being stalled, possibly for political reasons — a suspicion his superiors say was unjustified — he took his concerns to Congressional Republicans^^. How deftly the report skirts the issue of insubordination wherein the special agent shares his investigations with a politician over the heads of his superiors. Did he complain about his fears to higher ups at FBI head quarters or FBI director? Instead of asking this uncomfortable questions and seeking answers, the paper paints him as a hero whistle blower.
  6. Lastly, the Benghazi incident in which US ambassador was killed was much later blamed on Islamists, who CIA was cultivating. It is the policy of CIA to cultivate and use Islamists to destabilize secular regimes that are not serving US interests, such as Libya before and Syria now. Petraeus made mention that his resignation should not in anyway linked to Benghazi incidence. Such denials in fact confirm the suspicion.
Quite obviously the story put out and churned endlessly did not make sense because two major cogs in Obama’s foreign policy fell in one swoop over something quite minor [not to Petraeus’s wife of course] as sex or amorous feelings. The bigger picture, I got a sense, must be quite in the open but one was not getting it because of lack of familiarity with various actors in US politics and policy. Search on the internet, led me to Professor James Petras website, which has cogently exposed the real narrative: Elite Intrigues: It’s Not About Sex, Stupid! I just quote some parts below.
Introduction: The headline stories claim that CIA Director General David Petraeus resigned as head of the CIA because of an adulterous relation with his young biographer and that General John Allen, Supreme Commander of US troops in Afghanistan, was under investigation and his promotion to top commander of US troops in Europe was on hold, because, we are told, of his ‘inappropriate’ comments in the exchange of e-mails with a civilian female friend.

We are told that a ‘hard-charging’ local FBI agent, Frederick Humphries, Jr., had uncovered amorous e-mails sent by General Petraeus to his girlfriend-biographer in the course of investigating a complaint of ‘cyber-stalking’. Out of concern that the General’s ‘adulterous behavior’ posed a risk to US national security, Florida-based FBI Agent Humphries handed the evidence over to one of Washington, DC’s most powerful Republican, Congressman Eric Cantor, who in turn passed them on to the Director of the FBI… leading to Petraeus resignation….

However, Petraeus was well aware that this ‘grand alliance’ between the US and the rightwing Islamist regimes and movements to secure imperial hegemony, would require re-calibrating US relations with Israel. Petraeus viewed Netanyahu’s proposed war with Iran, his bloody land grabs in the Occupied Territories of Palestine and the bombing, dispossession and assassination of scores of Palestinians each month, were a liability as Washington sought support from the Islamist regimes in Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, Afghanistan, Pakistan, the Gulf States, Iraq and Yemen. Petraeus implied this in public statements and behind closed doors he advocated the withdrawal of US support for Israel’s violent settler expansion into Palestine, even urging the Obama regime to pressure Netanyahu to reach some settlement with the pliable US client Abbas leadership. Above all, Petraeus backed the violent jihadists in Libya and Syria while opposing an Israel-initiated war against Iran, which he implied, would polarize the entire Moslem world against the Washington-Tel Aviv alliance and ‘provoke the US-proxy supplied Islamist fundamentalists to turn their arms against their CIA patrons. The imperial policy, according to General Petraeus world view, was in conflict with Israel’s strategy of fomenting hostility among Islamist regimes and movements against the US and, especially, the Jewish state’s promotion of regional conflicts in order to mask and intensify its ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. Central to Israeli strategy and what posed the most immediate threat to the implementation of a Petraeus’ doctrine was the influence of the Zionist power configuration (ZPC) in and out of the US government.
Clearly, Petraeus had to go because the strategy he pursued to build on USA’s world domination ran foul of Israeli strategy and interests.

0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 

One Response to “Real Story behind CIA Director, General Petraeus’s Resignation.”

  1. Controlled Chaos: European Doubts Over *Project-Terror*. | Chintan Says:

    […] victim of controlled chaos, is going through very troubled times, whose city of Benghazi claimed US ambassador to Libya (see point 6) on 9/11 last year. Sami al-Saadi is spearheading a campaign to have a *Political Isolation […]

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: