Charlie Rose

SharkswithfrikingLazers  01/26/2013 10:36 PM Report

Why are CIA agents called "Spooks?"

http://assets.nydailynews.com/polopoly_fs/1.1199956!/img/httpImage/image.jpg_gen/derivatives/landscap e_635/alg-wife-broadwell.jpg

Apparently the Top Spook never learned why.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/19/2012 08:51 PM Report

Charlie, your moment of Zen:

Central Intelligence Agency Director of Security Mary Rose McCaffrey talks about evolving cyber threats to national security.?

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/EighthA

Buffer to 34:14 and hear about Petraeus and that his computer is scanned every day.

“He has been so educated in this new job and he is so smart and so good at this but even four stars have room to learn.”

HILARIOUS!!!

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/18/2012 04:30 PM Report

Charlie, now let me pitch you a new tourist attraction: MOUNT SHAGMORE.

Mount Shagmore is a tribute to men who sacrifice for sex. Their testosterone makes America great even when it results in great personal sacrifice.

Petraeus, Weiner, Spitzer and Clinton are the four faces to be blasted and chiseled into the mountain.

However for you Charlie, Tiger Woods too.

Perhaps in North Dakota in conjunction with, or even after, the oil boom?

NeilMacCallister  11/17/2012 04:05 AM Report

Hah! ..look at that picture above, ..those black leather arms, ..and that talon-red bodice!

Doesn't this brunette look EXACTLY like those women who "befriended" General Petraeus???

We Americans are such SHEEP!

***

David Petraeus, the man who brought order to a war-torn Iraq, is now asked to lie for a political President!!

("Don't do it Dave!!!")

Hah! I want to be in the bar where Stanley McChrystal and David Petraeus end up shooting pool together 10 years from now!

Oh! ..the stories they will be telling !!!

***

Until then, may the Enlightenment survive in SOME far corner of the world!!!!

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/17/2012 02:20 AM Report

Charlie, let me pitch you the movie.

President kills bin Laden. BUT another September 11th attack happens weeks before the election. This could be the end.

Back story: Four Star given CIA as a consolation prize to losing Joint Chiefs. Not really happy with the job. He is able to find himself 20 years younger, fawning over his older self and with a vagina.

To save the election it is necessary to "Colin Powell it" so look to the UN again but this time pull from there and cover story five Sunday shows with 'Muslim Innocence'.

Now Charlie we gotta go Hollywood for box office . . . Saddam Hussein is really alive with weapons of mass destruction in Pakistan in the same subdivision as bin Laden.

Four Star and vagina-me appear to be hiding from the media but use this smoke screen to capture Hussein and deliver the WMDs. The world is saved and yet no one gets to know.

Jason Bourne makes a cameo after being cured by Eric Kandel.

jcsunya  11/17/2012 01:36 AM Report

Norah O'Donnell's speculations belong on venues like Fox, or perhaps her haunts in the current CBS. She cheapens the Charlie Rose level of political conversation.

Max83  11/16/2012 03:50 AM Report

From the Young Turks:

Michael Hastings Tears Petraeus to Shreds on CNN

Youtube Video link: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vkWiZEiBqMA

''"Piers Morgan and Buzzfeed's Michael Hastings (http://www.twitter.com/mmhastings) had a sharp exchange over David Petraeus on Morgan's Monday show.

Hastings has been one of the former CIA chief and military commander's loudest critics in the days following the revelation of his extramarital affair. In a scathing Buzzfeed piece, he pointed the finger at the media, which he said had venerated Petraeus to disastrous ends. He repeated that point to Morgan, and took a shot at CNN's own Pentagon coverage.

"The larger point that I've been making is that essentially the media has played a role in protecting David Petraeus and promoting David Petraeus and mythologizing David Petraeus," he said.

Hastings said Petraeus had failed in both Iraq and Afghanistan, and escalated violence in both places."*

Cenk Uygur breaks down "bl.w j.b media" and how Buzzfeed's Michael Hastings does not fall into that category, as an unflinching journalist. Is he a provocateur? Or is he the only one in the video not trying to gain?''

MisterMittster  11/15/2012 07:46 PM Report

All In! I'm 'All In!' ... must be a slow news day, week, month, for the fake press, the petty news, and the lazy media.

Right Wing Ding radio is eat this shit alive! They're like ravenous vultures about all this juicy stuff! Their bird sized brains are having fun trying to wrap around this Bengazi- General- sexy slut scandal. Must be a cover up for Obama being a muslim donald trump hater. ...

Yeah, that's what it is.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/15/2012 06:53 PM Report

Disciplined, force of will, intensity involved with another intense person and a match for each other in intensity.

“The female David Petraeus.”

So then why would you ever break up with yourself?

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/15/2012 06:50 PM Report

Spymaster and his email commented on by John Stewart—don’t miss the innuendo and the obvious clue of being “All In”:

http://www.thedailyshow.com/watch/mon-november-12-2012/spyfall

output-based-money  11/15/2012 08:38 AM Report

This story interests me only where it touches on the resignation by David Petraeus and its acceptance by Barack Obama. At first blush, I say, NO RESIGNATION. If the resignation happens, I say, NO ACCEPTANCE: The President should ordered all his subordinates to stop the "colonoscopy" going on and all public discussion of it.

Congressman Cantor is guilty of political action for mixed motives.

The American people ought to treat this the way the French people have treated their stories of romance among adult politicians and celebrities.

The FBI director ought to demand that his professionals prevent leaks and all attempts to play politics in connection with their duty to minimize damage to the nation by crime and corruption.

This Rose program, however, was excellent -- especially its examination of the potential for the CIA to play a major role in future paramilitary defenses that replace major wars.

It seems to me that celebrated military and political leaders throughout history have participated in sexual conquests and adventures, many involving real love, both before and after the time when they held power, owned great wealth or enjoyed the blessing and curse of fame.

Bottom line -- its all none of the public's business -- but the Rose Show was, nevertheless, highly successful for its coverage of the many complexities involved. This was not Romeo and Juliet. But, on account of Charlie Rose, it was better than Desperate Housewives.

curious1aboutpol  11/15/2012 01:05 AM Report

My only question is Cui bono? ("To whose benefit?"), the Latin phrase used whenever a prominent Roman politician ever fell from grace. Who gains from Petraeus' fall?

Probably the most important question that needs to be answered but we may never find out in the murky world of politics and bureaucracies

Slim  11/14/2012 10:58 PM Report

This incident confirms the old admonition about power and its corrupting influences, on those with it and on those fatally attracted to it.

RevBarry  11/14/2012 10:26 PM Report

Ms OMs O'Donnell made comments re Gen Petraeus attitude during her last meeting with him. She was was so turned off,my term,she rode in a different helio ! This all sounds very much like someone with PTSD and refusing to accept it. May be? Could you look at the VA/DOD definition of PTSD. It says PTSD can only be due to a stresful event from an enemy combatant or an enemy POW enviorment. This means if Gen Petraus is suffering a PTSD type of behavior due to his affair,it is not PTDS as defined by VA or DOD. Think of military personnel who were hazed,suffered a horrific accident,witnessed a horrific incident outside of the combat zone can't have PTSD by VA or DOD definition.This makes him/her inellagbile for PTSD help and aid benefits. Thank you for allowing me to run my tangent,I believe I'm correct. I believe I'm correct about the General according to behavior changes noted.

Rev.Barry Cantrell

sugar  11/14/2012 10:20 PM Report

Charlie didn't get an answer to the question motivated by his woman friend who said to him, "A man-or woman-who cheats once will cheat again." Why were his guests intimidated to the point of not expressing an opinion, even qualified as a personal opinion? My guess is because the opinion would be in agreement with Charlie's friend...and who wants to admit that's a true statement? The reason there's so much personal secrecy in high places is because there's so much cheating and each covers the others' back ("you pat my back, I'll pat yours").

tabs  11/14/2012 07:15 PM Report

So the Great Commander leaves the field with a tarnished shield. Do we really care who got into whose pants? The important thing to remember here is that the Great stop being Great Generals, Presidients, Billionaires or whatever the moment they put their heads on the pillow at night. For then they become flawed and frail human beings with all the doubts and fears that make them vunerable in the end.

In this story the dicotomy of the Visceral world of command inhabited by the frail and flawed can be contrasted to the subjective world of Deep Blue where the doubts and fears of vunerablity become exposed.

Saultxyca  11/14/2012 03:50 PM Report

Farce is right. What biographer needs a "ghostwriter"? And what ghostwriter's name is on the book's cover? All In: The Education of David Petraeus is back to front. The book was created to facilitate the affair. If visible "ghostwriter" Loeb was "clueless" about the nature of the relationship between Petraeus and Broadwell, then he was too tone-deaf and out of touch to write anything other than an obsequious, wooden book about the former four-star general.

ChaunceyGardiner  11/14/2012 03:47 PM Report

As an average viewer, one sees a "PLAY MISTY FOR ME/FATAL ATTRACTION/female shuttle astronaut" story one day, a Profumo story the next. Two weeks from now, the story may or may not disappear.

What is interesting is the psychology of the situation, the questions that come up in the Shakespeare talks, questions that come up when discussing Freud or Wagnerian operas, and questions that come up in average people's lives (there's the saying that every author has one, maybe two, books in them -- and one has to wonder how commentors' own lives and values shape their comments).

Like most things, Freud eventually fell out of favor. Whether right or wrong, his view of homosexuality came under attack in the '70s, the connection between individual and social psychology and politcal theory diminished as postmodernism became more fashionable, and (perhaps in an Oedipal way) established ideas became renamed by newer professionals. One could wonder if endless psychoanalysis made any difference in the end or had degenerated into an annuity stream for those employed in the field.

While not everything that is written is true, the NEWSHOUR WITH JIM LEHRER once had an interesting guest who stated that the captured Saddam Hussein was interrogated by women similar (in dress, class, etc.) to Paula Broadwell under the theory that Hussein would respond in a more productive manner. HITCH-22 had a comment to the effect that a sadist and a masochist might get along, but probably not with one having a Golden Rule ethic; unlike classical physics, it's not clear that there's any sort of "emergent" univeral ethic. There are different psychologies and ethics that may go along with different political theories and such -- and good luck trying to reconcile them.

There is the view that all problems can be stated in terms of Plato/Aristotle; in C.P. Snow's version, many celebrity cultures (whether in politics, sports, the military, entertainment, etc.) are dependent on status (e.g., one's only as good as one's last project or John Searle's "status declaration function"). All such groups have their groupies.

This may be a bit beyond the scope of the discussion, but one can wonder (in a zero-base sort of way) how much of a celebrity culture one should have and (in the way that Hitchens' admired Orwell and his considerations) whether people determine laws or laws determine people. After making films like THE CANDIDATE, Michael Ritchie made THE BAD NEWS BEARS, raising the question about whether one should have a coach like Walter Matthau (or, in a business context, a W. Edwards Deming) or a Vic Morrow. While it's written that the military is the way it should be, it's not self-evident that it's really governed in the best manner (this is basically a "China vs. U.S." question). And whether one is talking about Cincinnatus/Washington or others, there can be very different leadership styles and character.

There's the standard idea (or assumption) that one starts out with Hobbes and then goes to Locke. Samuel Huntington's

argument was basically that such was all fine and good, but if one didn't have enough common culture, one esentially had to overrely on a "prosperity gospel" (or Pareto effiecient, win-win outcomes) to hold people together. Whether one is talking about Allan Bloom (a David Brooks influence) or others before or since, or using the terminology of neuroscience or philosophy or something else, there can be a place for discussion of values.

It's understandable why (like not discussing religion or politics at the dinner table to keep the peace) some people may want more of a French attitude, though it's not clear if this trend of the past two decades is good or bad.

On a practical note, there are many in the military who marry their high school partner and die that way. There are also many who don't. There are status concerns (as in any organization) about people using sexual politics to undermine established authority. There are also raw emotions. Many marriages fail after long deployments (and, since many of these relationships were founded in a bar, perhaps this shouldn't be surprising). In the extreme, one can observe cases where subordinate personnel sleep with the commander's spouse, spouses (in the Phillipines) running prostitution rings. etc. It's not pleasant to be in such environments (whether or not there is media coverage).

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/14/2012 03:30 PM Report

If Hoover were alive this would go into his personal files at the FBI like the ones on Kennedy (sex with spy), Eleanor Roosevelt (sex with female secretary), Martin Luther King (sex with other women) and on and on and on.

See the Hoover-less FBI is much more open which means it won't be run by one man for 48 years because of his secret files.

So there is that--transparency from the FBI and no blackmail.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/14/2012 03:24 PM Report

Put the two photos side-by-side--wife and mistress.

Rice pudding or chocolate cake?

When your wife becomes your grandmother (insert Barbara Bush or Eleanor Roosevelt) and you are deployed for what seems like forever then what the hell do think will happen?

Even Mr. Discipline gets hungry and must eat.

SharkswithfrikingLazers  11/14/2012 03:20 PM Report

Charlie, you skated around the real question.

How does the Big Dog in secrets get caught in a personal secret?

The "Spooks" get spookier every day.

Dasein  11/14/2012 12:58 PM Report

The election is over and the farce continues.

REMant  11/14/2012 12:44 PM Report

I don't accept the idea he should have been removed simply for having the affair (for I don't think he just upped and submitted his resignation). While it's amusing to think these generals may have just spent too much time watching "The Winds of War" and such, generaling has always involved doing a lot of schmoozing. (Indeed soldiering generally; many had a great time displaying sympathy for poor Vietnamese girls.) It got Benedict Arnold in trouble when, recuperating in Philadelphia after Saratoga, he became infatuated with a teenaged socialite formerly the paramour of a British officer - the infamous Major Andre - during their earlier occupation of the city. That, in conjunction with a lot of Continental infighting and bad management, led to his attempt to surrender West Point. In fact a good part of Phila society kept up communication with their British suitors. It seems Paris had nothing on the City of Brotherly Love. It is said Gouverneur Morris, later penman of the Constitution, lost his leg in an escape from the second floor bedroom window of the married woman he was "visiting." And in the early years of the Washington admin Alexander Hamilton paid blackmail to the husband of another Philadelphia woman he was having an affair with, entangling him with Aaron Burr. In olden days, however, the concern was grundyism, today I think it is to keep women on board politically.

I am led to think Petraeus and Broadwell, not only look, but are, pretty much alike, which, since I find her pretty repulsive, does little to enhance his image in my eyes. In Feb, when she appeared here regarding her book, I wrote that I considered him in the martinet category and too involved with the CFR. I found his career to have been unusually advanced, and I have always thought the counter-insurgency business to be bogus, and in retrospect, neo-colonialism. It was no surprise to see him sent to the CIA, and it made perfect sense, given what I believe are Obama's motives, to rid himself of the reluctant Gates, put Panetta in Defense to cut its budget, and move war-making to the CIA, to protect which Petreaus is leaving now. No horses or bayonets certainly needful for that. So I am not as surprised as Ignatius. And I think it's high time both motives of this admin, and the liberal press pushing this agenda, received greater scrutiny.

An attempt, in fact, probably has been made to cover this up and the Republicans are right to consider it in connection with the election. The White House incredibly says it knew nothing about this until just the day after. And it appears someone is lying about the timing now, perhaps because if it took place while he were still in the army, Petraeus would be liable for prosecution under Article 134 of the Uniform Code of Military Justice.

As an aide to the general remarked Broadwell's status seemed both peculiar and conspicuous. I notice that Allen looks a lot like Kelly, too. IMHO, altho they seem to be quite different characters, there's something similarly wrong about that "affair" as well. And with all this emailing. The woman intimated to police she had special status to get media removed from her house, and it's reported the family is deeply in debt (tho I can tell you $1.5 mill will not get you a house like that in Great Falls).

A lot of effort has gone into making life for our new colonials easier the past few decades even while their missions have crept, and while this is laudable, government administration, and certainly the military, should not be a matter of market-making; its officers and civil servants, not politicians. We've blurred these personal lines as much as we have those of foreign policy. I think even the undergraduate mission of the military academies ought to be ended, and the services made to rely on routinely educated enlistees for their officer corps. Quite frankly I think they aren't cost effective, and, especially if honor has been tossed out the window, dangerous.

I'm quite sure BTW that any outpost with wireless and/or Internet access knows all about this already.