Answers: Benghazi questions important, if truth is what we're after

Nobody really wants to talk about the horrible story that left an ambassador and three other Americans dead in Benghazi.

It is uncomfortable. It is sad. And it should not have happened.

And Secretary of State Hillary Clinton should be emotional as she is questioned about the attack and the requests for increased security that went unheeded.

Like it or not, she is the boss. Therefore, the buck stops with her. Period.

Outburst and tears aside, the truth is, those who are asking the questions should be asking the questions -- and would be remiss if they did not push for more answers, more accountability.

There are too many uncomfortable questions about why so much misinformation was leaked about the attack, so many times.

And then there is the timing -- right around the elections.

Is there a coverup? Who knows. Will we know for sure after the hearings are over who knew what when? Probably not. But even with that concern, it is time for there to be public questions and forthright answers about what occurred that day and in the months prior to the attack.

Why?

Even if the fact that four Americans lost their lives wasn't enough, there are now questions about whether or not the threat of al-Qaida really has been neutralized, as the Obama administration claims.

Perhaps this is evidence that the call for victory was made a bit too soon and that, perhaps, that particular topic was a little inconvenient to talk about when a vote was a couple of months away.

As the claims swarm about partisanship and unnecessary questions about Benghazi, we should be reminded that this is not the first time a public official has been asked to explain a decision or to explain a staff's actions.

And it should not be the last.

Published in Editorials on January 24, 2013 11:11 AM