Questionable Reports: Africom General Ham and Rear Admiral Gaouette Replaced – Rumored Cover Connection to Benghazi Slaughter….

I doubt, allow me to repeat and emphasize, “doubt“, these reports are accurate.    Why?   Because Congressman Jason Chaffetz is on record stating that in his visit to Libya he travelled with General Ham.   When Chaffetz asked Ham about whether he had a ready reaction force, according to Chaffetz – Ham told him “yes, however, we never got a request to assist in Benghazi”.

So why would there now be reports of Africom Command General Ham being replaced because of his non-compliance?   He said he never got the request for help, or call to mobilize?   He is not going to lie to the House Intelligence Committee   – No motive, Period.

Jim Hoft at GWP shares this story:   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 The Military Times reported:

President Barack Obama will nominate Army Gen. David Rodriguez to succeed Gen. Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command and Marine Lt. Gen. John Paxton to succeed Gen. Joseph Dunford as assistant commandant of the Marine Corps, Defense Secretary Leon Panetta announced Thursday.

Both appointments must be confirmed by the Senate.

Rodriguez is the commander of U.S. Army Forces Command and has served in a “variety of key leadership roles on the battlefield,” Panetta said.

He’s “a proven leader” who oversaw coalition and Afghan forces during the surge in Afghanistan, and “was the key architect of the successful campaign plan that we are now implementing,” Panetta said.

In announcing Ham’s successor, Panetta also praised the work Ham has done with Africa Command.

“Gen. Ham has really brought AFRICOM into a very pivotal role in that challenging region,” Panetta said. “I and the nation are deeply grateful for his outstanding service.”

More… The Obama Administration also relieved the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette.  It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment. The Stars and Stripes reported:

The Navy said Saturday it is replacing the admiral in command of an aircraft carrier strike group in the Middle East, pending the outcome of an internal investigation into undisclosed allegations of inappropriate judgment.

Rear Adm. Charles M. Gaouette is being sent back to the USS John C. Stennis’ home port at Bremerton, Wash., in what the Navy called a temporary reassignment. The Navy said he is not formally relieved of his command of the Stennis strike group but will be replaced by Rear Adm. Troy M. Shoemaker, who will assume command until the investigation is completed.

It is highly unusual for the Navy to replace a carrier strike group commander during its deployment.  (More)

If you see stuff about this angle, I would reserve opinion and wait til this information is confirmed and vetted.    The current situation is bad enough without any need to falsely amplify the potential of the FUBAR….. /SD

About these ads
This entry was posted in Benghazi-Gate, Egypt & Libya Part 2, Election 2012, Islam, Obama Research/Discovery, Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

43 Responses to Questionable Reports: Africom General Ham and Rear Admiral Gaouette Replaced – Rumored Cover Connection to Benghazi Slaughter….

  1. ytz4mee says:

    My understanding is that the Stennis wasn’t even in position/on station in the region on Sept 11th to be in play, so Gaouette is completely separate from the Benghazi coverup. The Stennis was doing a transpacific transit. Others who follow the carrier group movements closely can confirm where the Stennis was on Sept 11th.

    Like

    • aoifecrane says:

      We have air bases 1 hour away in Itally. We now know based on released emails that they watched this horror unfold for 5 hours…furthermore it’s not been reported there was an AC-130 gunship with target sights via CIA on the ground and they were not allowed to fire. This gets worse and worse.

      Like

  2. czarowniczy says:

    Flag officers are the consummate military politicians and they have a delicate balancing act in which they have to juggle peers and superiors while watching out for pretenders. While it is unusual for the Navy to replace a fleet commander while at sea ( I hear that he’s not being relieved, just replaced pending the outcome of an investigation) they would well have no choice were that decision made and ordered in the civilian chain-of-command. There will be one version for the public consumption, unless the offense were a court-martial offense, and a ‘what really happened’ for internal consumption only. I watched my one-star have to fall on his bayonet and resign after not only telling a 3-star in a briefing that the 3-star was wrong but pointing out in excruciating detail where he was wrong. The toad underling who gave the 3-star the faulty data was reassigned to some Ft Courage but my one-star, who had one of those ‘oh sh*t’ moments, watched his career gown down the drain in a flash. It’s a whole ‘nuther world at the flag officer level, nothing like at the grunt level, and I’m awatchin’ this one with both eyes, and I may rent another.

    Like

  3. ytz4mee says:

    One of the nice things about creating a disinformation campaign, with information that is easily discredited, in addition to flushing out leaks and those whose loyalty is in doubt is that it handily makes it very easy to then discredit actual credible information or tidbits.

    Because it’s not like there’s something big going on, with alot of “wheat” and “chaff” in the mix. Deliberately add more “chaff”, makes it more difficult to glean the “wheat”.

    Like

  4. woohoowee says:

    Thanks, SDC. I posted a link on today’s open thread regarding AP dissemination of replacing the Rear Admiral. Personally, I see this as a, “hey everyone look over there not at what is really going on regarding Libya”, move by Obama. Thoughts worth what they cost :-) If correct, none of this is doing them any good. He is one and done.

    Like

    • “hey everyone look over there not at what is really going on regarding Libya”….

      YUP +!

      Like

    • ctdar says:

      Col Hunt just said: Sec Defense Panetta gives order (of action)to the  President who is the one to make decision of approve or denial.
      Without a doubt it’s all on Obama

      If this was Obama as the Diplomat in peril would the response from the WH have been different? Yes

      Like

      • woohoowee says:

        Yep, w/o a doubt it’s all Obama. Just thinking AP is carrying water for him. A distraction with the Rear Admiral piece. But…… regular Americans aren’t looking away from Libya

        Read another AP article re: Benghazi, shortly before coming across the one posted on the open thread about the Rear Admiral. The AP article I didn’t post was slanted in Obama’s favor.

        Like

  5. dizzymisslizzzy says:

    Ty Woods dad and sibs will be on Justice with Judge Jeanine tonight at either 8 or 9 on Fox

    Like

  6. eoow says:

    I agree with the above. Having been the relieving officer (at a much lower rank) in a situation where the Chain of Command “Lost Confidence” in an officer it was quick and straight forward. The fact there is an investigation ongoing indicates the issue is not cut and dry. Over at Hot Air, Ace of Spades, has a well reasoned and big picture write up on this. Just my thoughts.

    Like

  7. Scott says:

    When it’s all said and done, we will be told it was the military’s fault. The media will inform us that the C.I.C., displaying heroic courage and conviction, made the decisions necessary to avoid World War III. Senior military officials almost screwed it up, though, and had to be replaced as a result. Prepare for the next big lie. Wait for it………

    Like

    • aoifecrane says:

      I don’t think so…not now. 20 years ago I would have agreed with you but info is coming out fast and furious now. This is going to continue to be a big story on the internet (the LSM is doing some kind of shuck and jive to either ignore this or downplay it on the 24 hour news cycle) and the closer we get to the election the more this type of story will shock any who are still undecided. How that is don’t ask me but apparently there are a few…. What this story is illustrating in a big way is what we’ve known all along. That Ogabe is for the most part a clueless, incompetent, unskilled hack adept at one thing….Marxist ideology…and a hyperinflated sense of his own self-worth…ok…two things. He’s out of touch and doing what he’s always done…nothing while ducking his responsibilites because he’s never had to be responsible. The bigger they are….

      Like

    • Critter says:

      When it’s all “said and done”, there will be more said than done.

      Like

    • From what I am told the Operational Decisionmaking Was White House first – Africom Second.

      By General Ham saying he was not “operationally requested”, that means the White House made all the decisions. The Commander In Chief made all the decisions, that’s President Obama.

      Like

  8. gretchenone says:

    Does anyone know the backgrounds of the new commanders?

    Like

  9. Icestation2 says:

    Just a quick question about what type of security/monitoring cameras the consulate would likely have had. One would imagine that security/monitoring cameras would be positioned around various key parts of the perimeter of the consulate. If so, would the footage from those cameras be automatically recorded?

    Like

  10. czarowniczy says:

    With hurricane Sandy bearing down on the DC to NYC area and the effects of it being felt through the election day I believe the good Admiral’s story is toast. Sandy and the election will take stage center and the issue of his being temporarily relieved will be moot post-election. Neither Obama or Romney want to stir up the upper levels of military management – flag officers are confirmed by the Senate and have many friends there. I’m looking at the distinct possibility that both sides of the aisle want this entire issue to go away – too many skeletons in too many closets. The powers usually sweeten the pot to get the officer(s) in question to quietly retire before either side decides to start shaking pillars. I think that whoever gets the pot on November 6th may well be the determining factor in the Admiral’s fate.

    Like

  11. Joe Dutra says:

    I smell a faint odor of mutiny.

    Like

  12. eoow says:

    As a follow up to a post I made here yesterday re the Admiral. I copied the following from a Drudge article; involved allegations of “inappropriate leadership judgment” and stressed it was not related to personal conduct.Inspector General is conducting the investigation.

    Like

  13. ED357 says:

    NEWSFLASH……

    The Admiral of Stennis usually deploys to WestPac……but on this early deployment (4 months rest) relieved the Enterprise on October 17 in the Middle East……

    http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2012/10/navy-replaces-admiral-leading-mideast-strike-group-because-of-ongoing-investigation/

    AND THE PLOT THICKENS…….

    Like

  14. Squidly says:

    No connection with the rear admiral to the best of my knowledge. The USS Stennis was no where close to Libya on September 11th. She left port in Washington state in late August and visited Phuket, Thailand a couple of weeks ago: http://www.kitsapsun.com/news/2012/oct/08/uss-stennis-sailors-visiting-thailand/

    Like

  15. m wheaton says:

    Consider that the real reason O moved military assets closer, rather than sending the military in to help may be that he had already selected his campaign narrative on foreign policy: “R is a rash and scary person (who will get the US into a war); I am a thoughtful, calm, deliberate person (who won’t let the US get into any more foreign military actions).”

    Suddenly sending the military into Libya would mess up his narrative.

    Four people have died so O could present a consistent political narrative to the American people before Nov 6.

    Like

  16. Ray Grace says:

    Kind of reminds me of the time Der Fuhrer promoted General Paulus to General Field Marshall during the battle for Stalingrad and had a ‘falling down in it’ fit because because he expected Paulus to commit suicide rather than surrender. Our Military people will continue to be used as cheap pottery pawns on the world chessboard as long as we have the mini-Fuhrer in charge!

    Like

    • JamesA says:

      Ray, you have NO idea what a dictatorship is! Obama was duly elected and there exists a Congress, Senate, and courts, all acting as checks to abuses of presidential power. I suggest before you make further claims how Obama is a dictator, that you detail exactly what he has done. Then, if you can convince me, then you go with me as I file a lawsuit to curtail whatever abuses of power he is engaged in. Otherwise, quit lying.

      Like

      • Ray Grace says:

        James, I feel sorry for you, truly do. Your response to me could have been anything but that I did not understand dictatorship. In my 75 years I have known more than a few people who lived under dictatorships ( one was my college professor, who served jail-time and forced military service under Hitler. Another was a Romanian Pastor who served 14 years in prison for being a Christian Pastor – his name was Richard Wurmbrand, and I knew him for more than a decade). Unless you have either lived under dictatorship or personally known people who have, you are simply a disciple of the Marxist American Education System, which I describe in my book, “The Coming Fourth Reich” (the book has documentation by the way, it’s not just an opinion piece).
        By the way, Adolph Hitler was also “Duly Elected” (at least in the beginning), as I describe in my book. Of course, Hitler was disowned by the American Leftist Media after he exposed just how evil his form of Marxism was, but they still protected him until that happened. Today they still protect Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Nicolae Ceaușescu, and other Leftists/ Marxists, just as they are protecting Obama.
        Lying? I’m afraid not. But I’ll not carry on a public argument with you, it would serve no purpose. Sorry.

        Like

        • JamesA says:

          Yes, I do know people who lived under dictatorships. Many, including my mother and grandparents, under Hitler, and others. Under dictatorships, speaking out against the government would get you arrested, the dictator controls the legislature, the courts, and all levels of government. Here, we have independent branches of government. The courts can, and have, reigned in presidential power. The states run independent of the federal government. Obama is term limited to 2, 4-year terms. Here, the press is free to speak out against the government, without fear. There are many times many in the press have spoken out against Obama. Funny, they still are free. Not under any government sanctions of any sort.

          Because Obama was not the person you wanted does NOT make him a dictator. We, the people, elected Obama. Welcome to democracy.

          Like

  17. howie says:

    I can’t take it. The question is this. What did Obama know? When did Obama know it? What did Obama himself do? Obama answer….we have to investigate. This is absurd. What is the logic? Obama knows what Obama did. It is Plus Ultra.

    Like

  18. Randy R. says:

    The American people who have any sense, love, revere, and trust the military. Hang in there. I stumbled on this site looking for some more truth, and had to comment.

    Like

  19. Josey Wales says:

    No one asks the questions: Why was the CIA facility being shelled? How did they know the coordinates to that degree? Why did this attack happen shortly after the meeting with a Turk gov’t official? How can they say they did not deny support when someone had a laser on the enemy? Why was NO effort made to rescue the ambassador by the U.S gov’t in DC? Having watched this in real time, why is Hillary not being prosecuted for using the amateur video lie? Was there a 2 plane load (C130) cleanup after the fact or not? Was the U.S. gov’t actually negotiating to send MANPAD’s to the rebels in Syria? Was the hit on the ambassador done by Iran to protect Assad from weapons getting secretly to the Syrian rebels and NOT by al quaida at all? Given Libya, in the broadest sense, why was there no “golden hour” backup plan to get all of those people out of there via Spectre, drones and special forces and was there really a 45 minute delay at the airport hours later because of screwing around with the local rebels in Libya? If this was a reprisal for killing the second in command al quaida, why was this the only one on that date mentioned in world news. As anniversaries go, where’s the pattern to justify this “retaliation/9-11″ assertion (2 unrelated points!)? Never mind all of your patriotic comments and petty thoughts about Obama, this is REALLY serious. Think for a change, reflect, ponder and ask lots of questions. Use your head for change!!

    Like

  20. skepticone says:

    so, i’m new to all of this conspiracy stuff. do i put the shiny side up/out or in/down when i make my tinfoil hat?

    Like

  21. wlc says:

    It depends on whether you want to keep information in or out. Many people, it seems, want to keep it out.

    Like

  22. So this warning sign that comes up when this is posted, your calling all these people liars.

    Like

  23. JamesA says:

    The question posed here is simple: did Gaouette’s transfer have anything to do with Benghazi? The answer is simple: No. CSG Stennis did not arrive in the Med until 10 Oct. 2012, after departing North Island on 01 Sep. 2012, then transiting the Pacific, with deployments with allied forces enroute. The rest of the arguments here having to do with Obama and Ham are irrelevant to the discussion at hand.

    Like

  24. JamesA says:

    Many people posting here and elsewhere are insisting that unless the Administration reveals everything to their satisfaction, it must be a conspiracy and/or a cover up. Quite likely, there were situations going on that we do not want our enemies to know about. If we know, so do our enemies. EVERY president has dealt with secrets – that is the nature of the world we live in. I will put a lot of faith in Congress’ ability to oversee what went on. They have the ability to see secret files, without arming our enemies with information in the process. While your desire for transparency is laudable, it is mistaken, if doing so will arm our enemies.

    Certainly, the conpsiracy theorists are running wild with all of this. Oddly enough, with a tight election bearing down, Congressional Republicans with the ability to raise alarms over this saw no reason to. Perhaps there is less here than the uproar indicates.

    Like

  25. Jeff says:

    Many dismiss a potential linkage of Gaouette with Benghazigate, but, an almost simultaneous dismissal of the top Army AND top Navy person for the region, just after Benghazi does have a taint, especially in these whose reps were essentially Stirling. Gaouette’s association is dismissed on speculation as to the carrier group’s distance from Benghazi. A few observations on that: 1.) The distance need not preclude a possible leadership stance of Gaouette to want to offer perhaps political, surveillance, strategic, or communications assistance. 2.) Regarding physical assistance, the battle went on for some 7 hours, Don’t know if that would have been beyond air range of the group, considering e.g. in-air refueling assistance. Now all of a sudden Petraeus goes down for his choice of a sexual partner. What happened to don’t ask, don’t tell? Was that only to apply to same-gender military sex acts?

    Like

    • JamesA says:

      The distance has a very direct relevance here: there was a Carrier Strike Group, on station, with command authority. CSG Stennis was enroute to REPLACE them. As such, Gaouette would have had no authority to respond, nor understanding of the area of operations to apply effective assistance. Likely, they were not even advised, given the DoD’s penchant for compartmentalization of information.

      They were in the middle of the Pacific Ocean – much further than any US assets in the Middle East. It is ludicrous to assert they could have responded in time from the middle of the Pacific. They would have needed to be refueled enroute, adding time to their response.

      As for “don’t ask; don’t tell,” that is inaposite here: many officers lose careers over adultery, or other vices. I am not saying that happened here, for I will allow the military and Congressional oversight to sort out what happened here – versus rumor.

      Like

  26. DocRock1007 says:

    Many dismiss a potential linkage of Gaouette with Benghazigate, but, an almost simultaneous dismissal of the top Army AND top Navy person for the region, just after Benghazi does have a taint, especially in these whose reps were essentially Stirling. Gaouette’s association is dismissed on speculation as to the carrier group’s distance from Benghazi. A few observations on that: 1.) The distance need not preclude a possible leadership stance of Gaouette to want to offer perhaps political, surveillance, strategic, or communications assistance. 2.) Regarding physical assistance, the battle went on for some 7 hours, Don’t know if that would have been beyond air range of the group, considering e.g. in-air refueling assistance. Now all of a sudden Petraeus goes down for his choice of a sexual partner. What happened to don’t ask, don’t tell? Was that only to apply to same-gender military sex acts?

    Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s