In response to:

Three Months Later: No Justice, Unanswered Questions on Benghazi

AmyDB Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 8:11 PM
Bigdog said.... Please do not attempt to tell me what I know so well. This nonsense about relieving this officer is willful misinformation. Gen ham took over for a suspended general and is serving out that officer's command time. He has also announced plans to retire at the end of his term, which was recently announced. You are wildly mistaken and now you just look stupid. _______________ Bigdog there is no friggin reason to be insulting. I just reported & provided links to what I saw on FNC & read from Military.com. Now if those sources are wrong then I apologize. Did you even give them a look? As I questioned below. Is it possible that Ham got a talking to & promised to mend his ways?
Troglodite Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 8:25 PM
Do a search on "washington times general ham" and see what you get!
Bigdogoffthechain11 Wrote: Dec 12, 2012 8:32 PM
use google and you will see that he is in command today and was not relieved or removed from command. As he was in DC on this date, there was no "second in command arresting him" or anything else that was produced by idiots on keyboards.

Three months ago today, President Obama woke up to the news that US Ambassador Chris Stevens and three other Americans had been murdered during a terrorist attack on our consulate in Benghazi.  The president had been informed that an active attack was underway the night before -- but how actively he followed the developing raid, and what (if any) orders he issued, remains a mystery.  On September 12, the president skipped his daily intelligence briefing and flew to Las Vegas for a campaign rally.  This much we know.  The Obama campaign eventually accused Republicans of "politicizing" the massacre...