Navy replaces Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette....... Why?
Discernment Highly Advised. This report comes from a rumored disinformation agent. This report is published because the truth in this report is about the removal of Admiral Charles Gaoutte. It is up to you to do due diligence and figure out why he was removed.
*****************************************************
October 28, 2012
Obama Fires Top Admiral As Coup Plot Fears Grows
A shocking new report prepared by the Foreign Military Intelligence Main Directorate (GRU) of the General Staff of the Armed Forces, and circulating in the Kremlin today, states that President Obama has fired one of the United States Navy’s most powerful Admirals over growing fears the US Military is planning an overthrow of his government.
According to this report, last Sunday (27th October) Obama ordered the immediate removal of Rear Admiral Charles M. Gaouette from his command of the powerful Carrier Strike Group Three (CSG-3) currently located in the Middle East.
 |
| REAR ADMIRAL CHARLES GAOUETTE |
CSG-3 is one of five US Navy carrier strike groups currently assigned to the US Pacific Fleet. US Navy carrier strike groups are employed in a variety of roles, which involve gaining and maintain ing sea control and projecting power ashore, as well as projecting naval airpower ashore.
The aircraft carrier USS John C. Stennis (CVN-74) is the strike group's current flagship, and as of 2012, other units assigned to Carrier Strike Group Three include Carrier Air Wing Nine; the guided-missile cruisers USS Mobile Bay (CG-53) and USS Antietam (CG-54); and the ships of Destroyer Squadron 21, the guided-missile destroyers USS Wayne E. Meyer (DDG-108), USS Dewey (DDG-105), USS Kidd (DDG-100), and USS Milius (DDG-69).
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 ofthe 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 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.”
GRU analysts in this report state that Obama’s “greatest fear” during the 11 September terrorist attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi was that a strong US Military response would hurt his reelection chances as the American peoples appetite for war has all but disappeared, and he would, also, be open to attacks from his far-left base who remain firmly opposed to further US military actions in the Middle East.
As we had, also, reported in our 17 September report “China Warns World War III Being Planned To Oust Obama,” White House fears are growing by the day that Obama is being pushed into a “Total War” scenario by the Pentagon in an action not unlike the situation faced by President John F. Kennedy when he faced off with against the powerful US Air Force General Curtis Lemay during the October, 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis.
Known well to Obama, this report continues, was the 1962 Pentagon proposal to Kennedy named “Operation Northwoods” that called for the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA), or other operatives, to commit acts of terrorism in US cities and elsewhere. These acts of terrorism were to be blamed on Cuba in order to create public support for a war against that nation, which had recently become communist under Fidel Castro.
Fearing his being faced with a similar Pentagon threat, GRU analysts say in this report, Obama’s reluctance to allow a US military response to the 11 September attack on the American Consulate in Benghazi was due to his not knowing who was really behind it, or what their ultimate objective really was.
Obama’s fears, apparently, were confirmed by the Federal Security Service (FSB), and as we reported on in our 9th October report titled “Monsanto “War” Kills US Ambassador To Libya” which blamed the Benghazi attack on the shadowy Italian eco-terror group Il Silvestre.
Following the attack on Benghazi, this FSB report further states, the eco -terror group Il Silvestre brutally assassinated British oil executive Nicholas Mockford, 60, who worked for the US oil giant ExxonMobil, two weeks ago on a street in Brussels, Belgium.
Though the links between either the Pentagon or CIA relating to Il Silvestre have yet to be firmly established, this GRU report concludes, it cannot be ruled out that further attacks against Obama’s interests by the US Military are not in the offing.
Most cryptic in this GRU report, however, was its noting, that based upon the 1962 American movie titled Advise & Consent, and the 1962 novel Seven Days in May (made into a movie in 1964), the warnings to President Kennedy about any American leader daring to challenge the Pentagon would be met with swift and harsh punishment. Kennedy, however, failed to heed these warnings and suffered the consequences.
To what Obama’s fate will be, especially should he continue to be in conflict with the Pentagon, it is not known. What is known, though, is that the American people themselves continue to remain ignorant of the dangers they face as the world around them continues to spin out of control as they continue to rely on lies and half truths spoon fed to them by their vast mainstream propaganda apparatus designed to keep them from knowing any truths at all.
October 28, 2012 © EU and US all rights reserved. Permission to use this report in its entirety is granted under the condition it is linked back to its original source at WhatDoesItMean.Com. Freebase content licensed under CC-BY and GFDL.
http://www.whatdoesitmean.com/index1621.htm
No comments:
Post a Comment