In an excerpt taken from a video of Paula Broadwell explaining what actually occurred in Benghazi, Broadwell explains some little known details that would have been otherwise unknown to the public. While new details unfold in her story, other previously well known ones had no mention at all, specifically the YouTube video that went viral beginning in July this past year "Innocence of Muslims". According to Broadwell there were more pressing reasons for the's concerning a break-out escape of Libyan militia prisoners.. in what had previously been known only as a consulate building. Broadwell says,

“Now I don’t know if a lot of you heard this, but the CIA annex had actually taken a couple of Libya militia members prisoner,”Broadwell told a crowd at the University of Denver alumni symposium on October 26. “And they think that the attack on the consulate was an effort to try to get these prisoners back. So that’s still being vetted.”  Broadwell's address was publically available on YouTube until this weekend; it has since been removed, although mirrors have surfaced.

The RT article goes on to say,

Until then, and even today, the CIA denies Broadwell’s claims that the CIA was holding anyone prisoner at what has long been described as a consulate building in Benghazi. Should her account prove true, however, it could mean that the agency had a secret black site prison in Libya, a fact long denied by Washington. If true, it could also mean that not only was the security of United States’ top intelligence office breached, but also may for once provide an impetus for the Sept. 11 attack".

Read the rest of the article and watch the video here

It seems the Benghazi tornado has just begun to reach maturing stage. The victims of the attack on September 11th 2012 were just the beginning of an obscure account that has been complicated by escalating accusations of epic military and political proportion - one that appears to somehow link to the recent Petraeus affair. With congress pushing the issue for answers about when and why the FBI began investigating it, there is little doubt that this storm will calm until a clear connection, or lack thereof, can been established between it and the violence that occurred in the middle east.

Do the statements above made by Broadwell prove she was privy to classified information through what she describes as "unprecedented access" to Petraeus? If the statements are found to be accurate this might mean that there was in fact a breach of classified information-- directly resulting from the former CIA director's affair. If Petraeus' affair with Broadwell began during his military career then this is in fact punishable by the UCMJ under Article 134.

Many more questions have been raised in light of Petraeus' resignation. Who wouldn't wonder as to the odds of such a scandal going unnoticed until directly following presidential elections? According to spokesman Doug Heye - House Majority Leader Eric Cantor knew in October about former CIA Director David Petraeus' involvement in the extramarital affair. Is it likely that his resignation will halt any testimony later down the road? Many people feel he should testify, including U.S. Representative Peter King who stated,  "David Petraeus testifying has nothing to do with whether or not he's still the CIA director, and I don't see how the CIA can say he's not going to testify."

Is there a strong argument for military punishment against General Petraeus if he is found to have had an affair while actively serving in the military? One in which he gave sensitive information to a woman who would later make that information available to the public, despite its sensitive classification?

Take this poll and let us know your thoughts!