According to (shadowy anonymous blogger) Sorcha Faal the Russian military's GRU foreign
intelligence unit presented a report to Kremlin leadership late last
month that said Obama removed one of the United States Navy’s most
powerful admirals from his command (in the wake of Benghazi 9/11)
specifically because he fears a military coup is being planned against him.
On 9/11/2012, that officer -Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette, commander of Carrier Strike Group Three in
the Middle East- apparently felt obligated to come to the aid
of besieged US defenses at the Benghazi consulate, violating an utterly
bewildering White House command he probably had a hard time believing
was even being made. Gaouette was said to be attempting to
help AFRICOM commander General Carter Ham, also purged by Obama for
violating of an obstinate White House insistence to 'stand down'.
Ham considered himself bound-by-duty to take action, but
the story goes that his second-in-command -a likely Obammunist-
promptly stepped-right-up and informed him he'd just been 'relieved of
his command', effective immediately- General Ham was then physically apprehended/arrested.
Subsequently -and despite Navy claims that he was NOT 'replaced' due to Benghazi- Admiral Gaouette was otherwise inexplicably removed as Carrier Strike Group commander on October 27th...
Faal:
US news reports on Obama’s unprecedented firing of a powerful US Navy Commander during wartime state that Admiral Gaouette’s removal was for 'allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment' that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East.
This GRU report, however, states that Admiral Gaouette’s firing by President Obama was due to this strike force commander disobeying orders when he ordered his forces on 11 September to 'assist and provide intelligence for' American military forces ordered into action by US Army General Carter Ham, who was then the commander of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), against terrorist forces attacking the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
General Ham had been in command of the initial 2011 US-NATO military intervention in Libya who, like Admiral Gaouette, was fired by Obama.
And as we can, in part, read from US military insider accounts of this growing internal conflict between the White House and US Military leaders:'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 '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...'
US news reports on Obama’s unprecedented firing of a powerful US Navy Commander during wartime state that Admiral Gaouette’s removal was for 'allegations of inappropriate leadership judgment' that arose during the strike group’s deployment to the Middle East.
This GRU report, however, states that Admiral Gaouette’s firing by President Obama was due to this strike force commander disobeying orders when he ordered his forces on 11 September to 'assist and provide intelligence for' American military forces ordered into action by US Army General Carter Ham, who was then the commander of the United States Africa Command (AFRICOM), against terrorist forces attacking the American Consulate in Benghazi, Libya.
General Ham had been in command of the initial 2011 US-NATO military intervention in Libya who, like Admiral Gaouette, was fired by Obama.
And as we can, in part, read from US military insider accounts of this growing internal conflict between the White House and US Military leaders:'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 '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...'
 |
| OBEY or perish |
Of course, the MSM press just parroted the dubious Administration line that Gaouette was removed from his post
(in mid-deployment, which is Moon-rock rare) because of an 'ongoing investigation' into 'inappropriate leadership judgement'- say what?
(in mid-deployment, which is Moon-rock rare) because of an 'ongoing investigation' into 'inappropriate leadership judgement'- say what?
In addition, Gen. Joseph Dunford -the Marine Corps' 2nd in command- is also suddenly 'stepping down'... maybe he too had a problem with just standing there while some Medieval savages rape and kill our ambassador and burn a US consulate to the ground.
I clicked over to Wikipedia to see what the left-leaning 'reference' site had to say about all this, yet even they can only come up with the most foggy, vague explanation.
Intentional obfuscation...? Keeping this one opaque only helps Barack Obama...
Many believe this was a forced retirement due to General Ham speaking out of turn about the brewing Benghazi attack fiasco of September 11, 2012.
A Navy Admiral, Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette, was also apparently involved in this confusing event as he was relieved of duty "until the matter is resolved."
are gone or on their way out as well.
Hey, Kim Jong Un is up to the same sort of 'purge' thing lately too- maybe Obama can ring him up and chat about purging, basketball, exchange tips on interrogation/guillotine techniques, etc.
But if you ask me, the idea of a coup plot sounds really kind of far-fetched- maybe it's all just in Dear Leader's (stoned) head, narcissists are known to be very, very paranoid.
No comments:
Post a Comment