TRR: Is a General losing his job over Benghazi?

Washington Times:

Is an American General losing his job for trying to save the Americans besieged in Benghazi? This is the latest potential wrinkle in the growing scandal surrounding the September 11, 2012 terrorist attack that left four men dead and President Obama scrambling for a coherent explanation.

On October 18, Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta appeared unexpectedly at an otherwise unrelated briefing on “Efforts to Enhance the Financial Health of the Force.” News organizations and CSPAN were told beforehand there was no news value to the event and gave it scant coverage. In his brief remarks Mr. Panetta said, “Today I am very pleased to announce that President Obama will nominate General David Rodriguez to succeed General Carter Ham as commander of U.S. Africa Command.” This came as a surprise to many, since General Ham had only been in the position for a year and a half. The General is a very well regarded officer who made AFRICOM into a true Combatant Command after the ineffective leadership of his predecessor, General William E. “Kip” Ward. Later, word circulated informally that General Ham was scheduled to rotate out in March 2013 anyway, but according to Joint doctrine, “the tour length for combatant commanders and Defense agency directors is three years.” Some assumed that he was leaving for unspecified personal reasons.

Click to continue:

About Eeyore

Canadian artist and counter-jihad and freedom of speech activist as well as devout Schrödinger's catholic

5 Replies to “TRR: Is a General losing his job over Benghazi?”

  1. If this is true and I believe it is then the chicago jesus is even more despicable than first imagined if that is at all possible.

  2. More and more reports are coming out that he was arrested and relieved of his command because he was refusing to let Americans die when he had the military force to save them. Obama is carrying out his goal of damaging the US to the point we will not be able to defend ourselves, I pray that the next administration will arrest and try him.

  3. Richard I am now leaning towards the only theory that fits all the facts so far. That Obama wanted the kidnapping to take place so he could trade the Ambassador for the blind Sheik. Then Ikhwan gets what it wants, which is what the riots were about in the first place, and Obama looks like a hero for getting the US captive back.

  4. I agree, with the weapons in the warehouses a gift to our enemies, this way they got the weapons without having to agree to anything. Not that they would keep the agreement anyway.

  5. They wanted it all, the exchange of the ambassador for the blind terrorist, Barry called a hero and the blasphemy laws to silence free speech. It was supposed to be a 1,2,3 punch instead of a deadly mess. Barry should have known the mustards would f*ck it up.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

*