White House must answer questions about Benghazi

Last Modified: Tuesday, October 16, 2012 at 5:26 p.m.

Hillary Clinton has now taken responsibility for the lack of security in Libya that contributed to the deaths of four Americans, including the U.S. ambassador to the Middle Eastern nation.

But that will not end questions about the matter, nor should it. The American people deserve continued briefings from the administration of President Barack Obama as to why and how our ambassador to Libya and three staffers were killed, and why the administration wrongly blamed an anti-Islamic YouTube video in the aftermath.

Clinton's mea culpa shouldn't end questions, which may be the motive as the presidential election draws near. Clinton, the secretary of state, told CNN that "What I want to avoid is some kind of political gotcha."

But it's too late for damage control. There is an urgent need for answers that can help prevent new terrorist attacks on U.S. targets overseas.

A key question is this: Why did the White House and the State Department ignore the need for better security for U.S. diplomatic workers in Libya? The workers were "soft targets" — that is, easy targets — for terrorists. Reportedly, the ambassador to Libya, J. Christopher Stevens, sent cables about the need for better security.

Benghazi had been a strong source of U.S. support during the battle against former Libyan dictator Moammar Gadhafi, so perhaps the State Department felt that the ambassador and his crew would be safer at the U.S. consulate there. But Stevens was worried that the Libyans would withdraw their protection.

The response to Stevens' assassination raises the second question: Why did the administration paint the attack in Benghazi as a response to a U.S. video made by a Coptic Christian?

The YouTube video, "The Innocence of Muslims," provided a plausible explanation. After all, the video had caused or contributed to rioting by Muslims elsewhere, particularly at the U.S. embassy in Egypt.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice, also blamed the anti-Islamic video in a series of media appearances in September. By late September, the White House began to reverse course, saying the Benghazi attack was indeed a terrorist action.

Americans should not have had to wait two weeks for such an admission. The nation needs to know immediately if it is under attack.

The blame for this error shouldn't begin or end with Clinton or the State Department, which runs the embassies. Americans have long believed the buck stops at the desk in the Oval Office. But the White House seemed determined, initially, to avoid admitting that al-Qaida was involved in the Sept. 11 attack.

A terrorist plot hatched on the 11th anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks would embarrass the White House right before an election. But Americans need to hear the facts about overseas terrorism.

The Obama administration is still fumbling around for an explanation of its response to the Benghazi attack. And it is late in offering plans to make sure such attacks won't happen again.

This should concern all, as the safety of Americans overseas or at home is the top job of the White House.


▲ Return to Top