Benghazi hearing raises many questions
One of the largest spectacles happening in the United States, especially in light of the ongoing debates and vying for the upcoming presidential seat, is the House committee hearing regarding the attacks that happened in Benghazi. For those who are unaware of either the hearing or the attacks themselves, Hillary Clinton is currently under investigation for what she and her team could have possibly done to prevent those attacks.
The attacks themselves happened on the anniversary of an already painful event for the United States, the anniversary of the fall of the World Trade Centers. In Benghazi, Libya, four U.S. officials were killed; one of these officials was a U.S. Ambassador, the first killed in the line of duty since 1979.
Where the controversy comes in with this event, is the question as to who should be taking the blame for these attacks. The U.S. Secretary of Defense and current presidential candidate Clinton is under fire for having had knowledge of the threat of attack beforehand, and not acting until after the fact. She had even gone as far as to attempt to conceal emails that would have supported her knowledge of the attacks and the nature of these attacks.
Initially after the attacks, they were not categorized as terrorist attacks by any group, but Clinton’s testimony seemed to suggest otherwise. Not long into to her testimony, Rep. Jim Jordan, R-Ohio, noted one of Clinton’s emails sent to her daughter the same night of the Benghazi attacks regarding to the deaths of U.S. officers and the fact that they were killed by an “Al-Qaeda-like group”. It could just be me, but a reference such as that sounds like a terrorist attack.
One of the larger concerns in my eyes is that this is one of our presidential candidates and a popular candidate at that. I find that when it comes to politics, which is a touchy subject for all, avoidance of the discussion of our decisions to vote for certain candidates is a norm, and that is completely acceptable.
The only concern is that for people, especially the people who are our own age, we must consider if we are looking into all factors when making decisions to vote. Are we watching all of the debates and keeping up on current events, or simply voting for the person who has the most fame? That is not to say that Clinton would not still be a good candidate, she does have a good amount of previous political work under her belt, but with this current scandal and questions of fault, there is a lot to be considered.
There are many questions that can be asked: Could she have prevented the Benghazi attacks? Was her response to these attacks the proper one? Was there a lack of honesty in the presentation of these attacks to the public? Was all of this played down in an effort to better her chances during the upcoming election? As the trial continues and more details unfold, I would simply urge others to keep informed, you never know what you are going to learn next.
