Posted on 10/27/2012 10:10:10 PM PDT by cruise_missile
The latest rumor making the rounds is that Barack Obama replaced General Carter Ham at Africom after the general made a move to help the US security officials at the Benghazi consulate and annex. Ham was replaced by Gen. David Rodriquez on October 18. Tiger Droppings reported:
The information I heard today was that General [Carter] Ham as head of Africom received the same e-mails the White House received requesting help/support as the attack was taking place. General Ham immediately had a rapid response unit ready and communicated to the Pentagon that he had a unit ready.
General Ham then received the order to stand down. His response was to screw it, he was going to help anyhow. Within 30 seconds to a minute after making the move to respond, his second in command apprehended General Ham and told him that he was now relieved of his command.
The story continues that now General Rodiguez would take General Ham’s place as the head of Africom.
Sure enough Obama nominated Gen. David Rodriguez to replace Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.
(Excerpt) Read more at thegatewaypundit.com ...
Great information, cruise. Thank You!
As odd as this may sound, Woods & Doherty may have inadvertently saved the republic with their ultimate sacrifice.
“REPLACING 2 GENERALS AND 1 ADMIRAL THUS FAR”
Over Benghazi? Where did that news come from?
Obama: “No No No No, God Damn America, Dats in da Bible! Stand down General! I’m enjoying this video!”
Our president is a sleazbag.
Re replacing Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette, the commander of the USS John C. Stennis strike group,
“A Navy official familiar with the circumstances of the investigation said it involved allegations of “inappropriate leadership judgment” and stressed it was not related to personal conduct.”
I responded to a post by a Freeper on another thread tonite; it fits here as well:
Freeper:
“I did not see Huckabee tonight, but someone on Twitter said that Catherine Herriage told the Gov that she had documents that proves the Obama Admin was running guns to Syria via Libya.”
My response:
I did see the program and she (Catherine) did say it. It appears we have a sub-story going on here, two stories for the price of one. There is the Obama & his henchmen didn’t come to the Ambassador/our Seals’ rescue story, and then there is the sub-plot of weapons transfers taking place. A ship appears in port in Libya with arms/munitions aboard it a few days before the Sept. 11th ambush takes place. The Turkish ambassador meets with the ship’s captain, and then, on Sept. 11th, that same Turkish ambassador meets with Christopher Stevens, our ambassador, shortly before the attack by Muzzie terrorists takes place.
Why was this Turkish intermediary meeting with our Ambassador? Was it for the transfer of weapons from Turkey through Libya to be delivered to opposition forces in Syria? Was this our conduit for getting weapons to the Syrian opposition, with Chris Stevens, our Ambassador, being right in the thick of it? Why did Stevens go to Benghazi on Sept. 11th, with no announcement or fanfare or protection to speak of. And to meet with the Turkish representative, right after a ship full of arms shows up in Libya coming from Turkey? Turkey, which sides with the opposition in Syria, and wants them armed. And our involvement being to grease the skids and facilitate getting these arms through Libya to Syria for opposition use. The thlot gets plicker. Perhaps this is why Steven’s visit to Benghazi that day was kept hush, hush. Because he was going there to help facilitate an arms transfer. Perhaps, if one wants to be more Machiavellian, that is why Obama & his minions that night thought it might be a better idea to just let the Ambassador and our navy seals be expendable rather than draw attention to what the real purpose of the meeting of the two Ambassadors prior to the attack was for. Just let the Ambassador die rather than let secrets get out.
Well, that worked real well, as I must say that Fox News’ Catherine Herridge, Jennifer Griffin, and Bret Baer, have all sunk their fangs into this story bigtime. Also one mightily irritated CIA is spilling the beans to House/Senate Pubs behind the scenes, blowing the whistle on the Obama regime as to what really is happening rather than take the fall for this goon Prez.
Stay tuned, in best Flash Gordon serial style, for the next episode.
P.S., Petraeus is on Obama’s side. Maybe to try to cover up the arms transfers that are secretly taking place as I stated above. Or maybe he really thinks like a Dem, or his ambitions override a sense of honor. Don’t trust him anymore. Not since he went to work for Obama.
I keep warning people that they have to check Gateway Pundit’s facts before running with what he posts. He gets overzealous sometimes.
WASHINGTON, Oct 10 (Reuters) - President Barack Obama on Wednesday nominated General Joseph Dunford, the No. 2 Marine officer, to lead the war effort in Afghanistan and oversee plans to withdraw most of America’s combat forces from the country by the end of 2014.
Dunford, if confirmed by the U.S. Senate, would replace General John Allen, who took over command of the Afghan mission in July 2011 and was nominated by the president on Wednesday to become supreme allied commander in Europe.
Dunford, who served in Iraq, has been assistant commandant of the Marine Corps since October 2010, had been widely expected to take charge of U.S. and NATO troops in Afghanistan as Allen rotated out of the post.
No way the order would have come directly from Obama to the General, it would have been the Generals commander ... who was probably sitting right next to Obama in the ready observation room.
Because if my President jumped me and gave a direct order to my subordinating general I would resign right then and there on the spot in front of the whole room.
The best explanation I have heard is that Bozo wanted to make a prisoner exchange. This was supposed to be a kidnapping, not a slaughter, and Bozo was supposed to look like a hero by getting the Ambassador and the other people back by trading the blind sheik for them.
This sounds plausible to me and makes sense in a horrible way. The only thing is that the muslims betrayed him and killed the people instead of capturing them.
This is all conjecture of course but there you have one possible reason.
Not sure I get your point. Are you saying there is nothing behind all this shuffling of top brass?
There’s an even uglier supposition right here.....
http://lamecherry.blogspot.com/2012/10/analgate-final-hours-of-chris-stevens.html
That looks more than a little nutty
You and I both better hope that’s the case!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.