I heard on the radio today that General Hamm left because he has an ailing wife, not due to the Benghazi mess.
No doubt his ailing wife got sick of hearing the Gen come home every night and saying he was disgusted having to cover for this %#@%%%!@%#$^^*%&%#%@^, Mother..(&^#%@$!%#^..Commie..^#$@!$%@#^*%^%**^(.. and, he's about to say so in pubic.. just a guess.. :)
His wife? That’d be a good story. If some incident like this did happen, to cover their a** and for him to retire as four star they may have made a deal.
But check this out:
Question 2: Leon Panetta said this (3) about sending military assistance to the annex:
We quickly responded, as General Dempsey said, in terms of our deploying forces to the region. We had fast platoons in the region. We had ships that we had deployed off of Libya, and we were prepared to respond to any contingency and certainly had forces in place to do that. But as a basic principle here – the basic principle is that you don’t deploy forces into harm’s way without knowing what’s going on, without having some real time information about what’s taking place. And as a result of not having that kind of information the commander who was on the ground in that area, General Ham, General Dempsey, and I felt very strongly that we could not put forces at risk in that situation.
The fact is, American assistance WAS sent from Tripoli that night, but it was not military assistance. Who were the 8 guys sent from Tripoli working for? It is logical to assume they were CIA agents or on their payroll. Notice, in the State Department briefing of Oct. 9th, they do not describe the Tripoli contingent other than this:
As the night goes on, a team of reinforcements from Embassy Tripoli arrives by chartered aircraft at Benghazi airport and makes its way to the compound.
So what we have here is the first huge contradiction between Panetta and the military and the CIA. SOMEONE sent those guys from Tripoli, but it was not the military. Why was it ok to send 8 lightly armed American guys from Tripoli into harm’s way to rescue 30+ people in Benghazi, but not ok to send a heavily armed special forces contingent who have trained for just such a scenario?
The State Dept. was asked about the Tripoli 8 on Oct. 9th and here was their response:
SENIOR STATE DEPARTMENT OFFICIAL NUMBER TWO: The calls were made to Tripoli at the moment that the – at the same time the agent in the [Tactical Operations Center] sounded the alarm and then proceeded to make calls. I’m not going to go into any details about the number of security personnel who moved.
Notice the State Dept. refers to them as “security personnel.” Whose security personnel? Why only 8 sent (notice State Dept won’t give number sent)?
http://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2012/10/benghazi-a-reader-assesses-the-evidence.php
37 people were evacuated. Apparently there was a response (an early NBC story from 9/12 said Marines were sent from Tripoli; a later Big Gov story said no Marines were in Libya at the time!)
Another thing to look into was the regional security guy for Libya apparently mounted a counter offensive but there were too many insurgents. This man on 9/12 said it was a terrorist attack and not a YouTube video riot. He was fired a week later. Deputy Interior Minister Wanis Al-Sharif.
Anyone interview him after he was fired?