Before getting into this subject, and so there will be no misunderstanding about my objectivity regarding the night our embassy fell and our Ambassador and three other good Americans were killed, I want to state for the record that I did not lift an intellectual finger to defend Richard Nixon during the Watergate trials. And I vigorously defended Bill Clinton against frivolous and unjust impeachment proceedings. I voted for Bill Clinton in his second term, and I happen to like Hillary Clinton and think she did a good job as Secretary of State.

So let’s dispense with any thought that I’m partisan, or that I believe there is some kind of conspiracy being perpetrated, or that I’m out to get the President, or thwart Hillary’s election bid for Presidency. I have no idea who I will support for the presidency in 2016.

However, there are questions that I would like answered. After all, If Hillary Clinton runs for President of the United States, she will first and foremost be the Commander-in-Chief of this country. It is therefore of the utmost importance to know whether she was competent and truthful in the handling of the Benghazi attack. The Democrats should also want to get to the bottom of some obvious unanswered questions.

Congressman Trey Gowdy, who will preside over a house panel investigating the Benghazi incident, posed many questions he wanted answered, one of which was, “What was Chris Stevens our Ambassador doing there that night on 9/11/2012?” As a former prosecutor, he will lead an inquiry into that episode. Among the questions I'd like answered are the following:

We know that there were numerous requests for more security to protect the compound that was attacked. During the year there were several bombings in the area; the Red Cross and the British Embassy both closed and left the country for safety reasons. During the same period our security personnel fell from 30 people to 9. Why? And who was it that made that decision; and were Hillary and the President informed of that decision?

Where were Hillary and Obama the night of the attack? We now know that the President was not in the situation room. I know the President had a fundraiser in Vegas the next day which he made, but did he or Hillary take any actions to save our men under attack? If it was not feasible to try, did either call any heads of state in the immediate area and ask for help? If not, why not? Remember, this was the first time we had had an Ambassador under attack in 30 years – it was a huge event. I’d like to know the thinking process that led to the decision not to do anything.

We know the controversy over the motive of the attacks: allegedly they were caused by an obnoxious video. But we also have evidence from testimony under oath from the CIA and others that the White House was informed within 3 days of the attack that it was not caused by a video but was a professional and organized attack by terrorists with military weapons and military experience; that it was not “a protest that got out of hand”, it was an organized plot to kill the Americans in the Compound.

Assuming that Susan Rice believed it was due to a video and did not lie on the 5 interviews she gave the Sunday morning following the attack, and that the White House knew within days all of the details that contradicted the video motive, why then did President Obama go to the United Nations 14 days after the attack and say, "There are no words that excuse the killing of innocents... There is no video that justifies an attack on an Embassy."   Why was Obama still pushing a theory that was disproven?

And in the same speech he said, "And there should be no doubt that we will be relentless in tracking down the killers and bringing them to justice."

Does anyone really feel the United States has been "relentless" in going after the murderers of our people in the last two years? For a year, Benghazi was totally ignored by the press and the Administration until the Republicans began holding hearings. Without the relentless pursuit of the story by Fox News, we would not know much of what actually happened and we still know very little. My question is, what has the Administration done to relentlessly “track down the killers and bringing them to justice"?

Which brings up the last question: Why hasn't anyone on the ground in Benghazi been interviewed by the Administration? The Foreign Press plus a few American reporters have managed to go to the area and talk to a few witnesses, but the Administration to my knowledge has done nothing to find out what happened and why, nor to talk to anyone actually involved, except their own personnel. Obama sent the FBI to collect evidence on the scene right after the attack, but they were never allowed to go onto the compound. Yet a reporter from CNN did, and found classified papers lying in plain sight. Why and how was the FBI prohibited from entering the compound and yet a CNN reporter was somehow allowed access?

These are reasonable questions that need reasonable answers. I am not assuming there are no answers. I’m not claiming there’s any kind of conspiracy, cover-up, or even incompetence. I’m just looking for the answers to some obvious unanswered questions, and hoping that a bi-partisan committee of objective men and women can be formed to provide them.

Paul Nathan