[PassedOut]

luke warm, on 2012-November-13, 16:33, said:

i'm still a tad upset that nobody has questioned the fbi's involvement in all this, especially the reading of private emails

Seems like you are questioning it, and so am I. Let's hope others are too...

[mike777]

PassedOut, on 2012-November-13, 16:38, said:

Seems like you are questioning it, and so am I. Let's hope others are too...

Homeland security...notice the word...home.....



As many before us have remarked, this whole David Petraeus (and beyond) sex scandal plays like something out of Homeland

btw people may not know but Homeland is filmed here where this mistress lives.
If you watch the show, this may answer some of your questions, Jimmy.


http://www.wcnc.com/...-133099713.html


http://www.sho.com/sho/homeland/home

[kenberg]

I like Homeland a lot. Well conceived, well acted, well written. Sorry but I don't remotely see a similarity with the Petraeus mess.

The FBI, I believe, did a forensic examination of Petreus' private computer. I am pretty sure they would need a search warrant to do that with my computer, but I don't work for the CIA and I have no security clearance. I don't know much of anything here, but I have always understood that you give up some privacy rights if you work for the CIA or the NSA. I guess if I were to think about it, I might be surprised that Petraeus could actually have an affair and keep it hidden.

I cannot totally vouch for this story from a friend, but he doesn't make things up. He is a prof and his wife works for the NSA. There was a party planned for some evening and there would be a number of foreign nationals there. In the afternoon he received a call from the government telling him it would be ok for him to take his wife to the party. Fine, except he could not recall mentioning the party to anyone and hadn't really thought much about whether he wanted to go. It was that chip thing they had planted in his head probably. (Joking about this last part.)

Myself, I'm not ready to jump on any bandwagon here. The simplest explanation is often the best. Petraeus had an affair. The woman got jealous of his possible attention to another woman and she sent some stupid e-mails. The recipient of the e-mails got nervous and talked to her friend in the FBI and things went on from there. Perhaps there is something far more sinister somewhere but I'll wait for the movie.

But I really do recommend Homeland. From the beginning.

[BunnyGo]

By the way, here's an update from the Ethicist about whether or not the column he published was related directly to this.

http://www.grantland...nspiracy-theory

[luke warm]

i watch the show, mike, religiously... that and dexter and hunted and others are very good imo... but those (supposedly fictional) shows don't explain the incredible loss of personal freedoms signified by a federal agency's ability to delve into any area of your life it wants... the patriot act was and is a bad idea

[kenberg]

Reading this morning about the e-mails (some 10 or 20 thousand pages) between Kelley and General Allen ( a new name in this show) my wife suggested the explanation: We are dealing with a couple of military groupies.

She may have a point.

I am removing Ms. Kelley from her place of honor on my sympathy list. Reading the Post, I see that while she and her husband are throwing lavish parties for the brass the banks are foreclosing on some of their property and there are being sued to recover money from overspending on credit cards. Out of control behavior usually ends badly.

I can't say I think much of Petraeus' judgment in his choice of associates, sexual indiscretions aside.

[y66]

The judgment problems are troubling and annoying. Hard to believe the military does not routinely check out people like the Kelleys or that two of its most senior officers could be so stupid about email.

[blackshoe]

y66, on 2012-November-14, 10:49, said:

The judgment problems are troubling and annoying. Hard to believe the military does not routinely check out people like the Kelleys or that two of its most senior officers could be so stupid about email.

Been a long time since I was responsible for security clearances, but I do remember one thing - they're bloody expensive, and the higher the clearance, the more expensive (and more thorough) the investigation. I also remember that the results of the investigation are unlikely to be released to the person being investigated — or for that matter to anyone else.

[y66]

From ThinkProgress via Krugman

Quote

Right-wing televangelist Pat Robertson absolved former CIA Director David Petraeus of blame in his affair with biographer Paula Broadwell, implying that Broadwell initiated the affair and that Petraeus was powerless to resist. Speaking on The 700 Club, his show, Robertson said Petraeus’ conduct was understandable because “the man’s off in a foreign land and he’s lonely and here’s a good-looking lady throwing herself at him. He’s a man.”

When can I start buying shares in the 2016 Democratic candidate for president on Intrade?

[ArtK78]

Wow. Are you sure we are discussing the 2016 presidential election here or the 1816 presidential election?

I wonder if Rush Limbaugh is going to back up Pat Robertson on this.

[kenberg]

Stand by your man:

But if you love him, then you'll forgive him
Even though he's hard to understand
And if you love him, oh, be proud of him
'Cause after all he's just a man


But if I recall correctly, Tammy Wynette got a divorce.


If I ever need Pat Robertson to defend me, please just pass the hemlock.

[PassedOut]

y66, on 2012-November-14, 10:49, said:

The judgment problems are troubling and annoying. Hard to believe the military does not routinely check out people like the Kelleys or that two of its most senior officers could be so stupid about email.

THE SURVEILLANCE STATE TAKES FRIENDLY FIRE

Quote

It would appear that Petraeus and his hagiographer-turned-running-mate-turned-mistress, Paula Broadwell, took precautions to avoid discovery of their relationship. They maintained multiple “alias” e-mail accounts and, according to the Associated Press, may have borrowed a bit of tradecraft from the Al Qaeda playbook—sharing an e-mail account, and saving messages for one another in a Draft folder, rather than running the risk of sending bytes across the ether.

But if we know that kind of subterfuge is being used by terrorists, then it’s almost axiomatically an inadequate counter-surveillance option. It’s not yet clear on precisely what legal authority the F.B.I. obtained access to Broadwell’s e-mail, but under the relevant federal statute, the Electronic Communications Privacy Act, the government need do little more than ask. Originally passed in 1986, the law is notoriously outdated, and considers any e-mail that is over a hundred and eighty days old to be “abandoned,” meaning that the author of the e-mail no longer has any reasonable expectation that it would remain private. So to obtain access to this e-mail, the F.B.I. doesn’t need a court order; it just needs to ask your e-mail provider.

Good thing most of us don't give a damn about the approval of other folks. But for sure I wouldn't be interested in running for office or taking any position where the snoops could affect my life.

[billw55]

Perhaps Pat Robertson's comments are colored by a little guilt or worry of his own. He is in a position of authority in his own subculture. This usually grants men certain opportunities, and often attracts a certain kind of women. Who would fall over in surprise if he was outed for an affair?

[luke warm]

PassedOut, on 2012-November-14, 12:20, said:

But for sure I wouldn't be interested in running for office or taking any position where the snoops could affect my life.

i blame the republicans mostly for this... homeland security, the patriot act, etc, and now they won't stop till they tax the freaking internet

[mike777]

I dont get all this handwringing over privacy....


privacy was lost long ago...

[dwar0123]

mike777, on 2012-November-14, 18:39, said:

I dont get all this handwringing over privacy....


privacy was lost long ago...

Ugh, so in your fantasy world, do you think everything lost can never be found again?

[mike777]

dwar0123, on 2012-November-14, 19:00, said:

Ugh, so in your fantasy world, do you think everything lost can never be found again?

bacause there is no privacy...of course....it whatever it is can be found again...

did you hear about a hamilition or jefferson affairs....

old abe had a wife thatwas nuts...etc etc...

how about roosevelt....eisenhower....kennedy....johnson...etc.....

did you hear the one about the first gay president.....he was single....aND SLEPT IN A BED WITH MEN..


and now people are shocked about emails??really?


I understand if you live in a fantasy world where there is privacy ...... a lot of privacy

just let me check with a few chinese hackers...

[phil_20686]

It seems like most people in my generation gave up on privacy a long time ago. It just doesn't really mesh with the internet age. Especially re health and that kind of things. My parents generation don't seem to ever talk about them. My generation puts their diagnoses on facebook for the whole world to see.

[Trinidad]

20686 seems correct. I am from the generation from before the 80286 and I do indeed value my privacy.

Rik

[TimG]

This morning's Boston Globe online features the headline "Broadwell fell short of her degree goals at Harvard". I don't see the point in "add[ing] to the portrait of the biographer" as the article purports to do. (I didn't read beyond the headline and accompanying blurb.)

Part of the privacy issue is a two-way street, the media would not be trying to create a portrait of Broadwell if the public didn't demand it through their choices about what to read and watch.

I don't see why this should be dominating the news. CIA director had an affair, decided to resign as a result, resignation was accepted. Let's move on. No need for rubbernecking.