Editorial: Clinton takes the blame for Benghazi failure
BY World's Editorials Writers
Wednesday, October 17, 2012
10/17/12 at 2:54 AM
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton stepped up and took responsibility for the security failure in the Benghazi tragedy.
Is she falling on the sword for her boss who is locked in a tight presidential race? Or is she simply making the point that what happened at the consulate ought not be a political talking point and that there are reasonable explanations for the breakdown that led to the death of U.S. Ambassador J. Christopher Stevens and three other Americans?
More than likely, some of both.
Clinton is correct when she says that she is responsible for the thousands of State Department employees as well as hundreds of facilities around the world.
She also is correct when she says that early information during any such attack can be incomplete if not incorrect. The Obama administration's initial response was that the attack was the result of the protests being staged over the release of a film trailer that was critical of Islam.
That proved incorrect when it was discovered that it had been a well-planned attack by terrorists to coincide with the anniversary of Sept. 11, 2001.
Republicans in Congress and on the campaign trail have pounced on those discrepancies and accused the Obama administration of failure to provide adequate security for the consulate in Benghazi.
The House is "investigating." There is plenty of political hypocrisy to go around in this tragic event. It is the House Republicans, who now accuse President Obama of ignoring calls for security, who voted to cut spending for security at embassies around the world.
What happened in Benghazi might have been avoided with adequate security. Or maybe not.
Questions need to be answered. Steps must be taken to ensure the safety of our diplomats and their employees working abroad.
Making it a political issue ought to make every American looking for those answers cringe.
Original Print Headline: Answers