Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

ZETA CONFIRMS: Filmmaker Says Mckhrystal Part of Pat Tillman Cover Up!

Expand Messages
  • nathaniel x vance
    [Questioner]  Is there anything the Zetas can say about Gen. McChrystal expressing such dissatisfaction with Obama as commander-in-chief? Why did McChrystal
    Message 1 of 1 , Jun 28, 2010
    • 0 Attachment
      [Questioner]  Is there anything the Zetas can say about Gen. McChrystal expressing such dissatisfaction with Obama as commander-in-chief? Why did McChrystal choose to do so publicly? Is this indicative of a widespread attitude among the military leadership or the troops in Afghanistan? A sign of a deeper split between the military and civilian leadership? [and from another] 'Angry' Obama summons Gen. McChrystal over scathing interview [Jun 23] http://newsinfo.inquirer.net/breakingnews/world/view/20100623 The future of the US military commander in Afghanistan hung in the balance Tuesday over an explosive interview in which he and top aides mocked and criticized the Obama administration.
      -
      [Zeta Response]  The McChrystal interview with Rolling Stones could be interpreted in two ways - that McChrystal alone had distain for Obama's military judgement, or that there was revolt in the military boiling just under the surface. In that the US military took the "football" away from Bush, but made no public statements about this, indicates this is not how the military works when deeply disappointed or suspicious of the judgement of a Commander in Chief. An insight into General McChrystal's modus operandi is his handling of the Pat Tillman affair, where he lied to the family and to the public about friendly fire being the cause of Tillman's death. In fact, it was an assassination of Tillman, approved up the line and undoubtedly including approval from McChrystal himself.

      What is different, then, about McChrystal's ability to operate as he chose under Bush and Cheney and his ability to ignore the rules under Obama? Obama does not tolerate this type of rogue behavior in the military, where Bush and Cheney looked the other way as long as the outcome was in accordance with their own agenda. Obama is not seen as a weak or ineffectual commander within the military, as Bush was. Bush was in fact seen as almost insane, and thus the decision at high levels to counter his edicts behind the scenes while keeping the situation from the public. By insisting on a united front, while taking military advice into consideration prior to his decisions, Obama is seen as running a tight ship.
      <http://zetatalk.com/ning/26ju2010.htm>
      -
      Filmaker Report:
      <http://www.foxnews.com/entertainment/2010/06/24/mcchrystal-pat-tillman-bar-lev/ >
       
       

      The wicked ENDTIME - NOT the RIGHTEOUS! http://Zetaheaven.org:  


      [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.