From Libya to Orlando: Following Hillary's scorched-earth trail
© Getty Images

Journalists are quick to jump on the anti-Trump train accusing him of a scorched-earth strategy that is nothing more than conspiracy mongering, however millions of Americans disagree and see through the Clinton smoke screen. The media is out-of-touch with what voters are concerned about, and the issues that really matter.

There is a strong argument to make that Secretary Clinton’s decision to aid and abet a revolution in Libya in 2011, without a day-after-tomorrow plan, has had dire consequences for the world.

ADVERTISEMENT
The destabilization of Libya opened the floodgates of radical Islamic terror resulting in the attack in Benghazi on September 11, 2012 killing four Americans, the rise of the Islamic state and resurgence of terrorism, the refugee crisis and humanitarian disaster in Syria resulting in the deaths of hundreds of thousands of children, and the Islamic State inspired attacks in Europe and the United States murdering innocent people.

This is the legacy of Hillary ClintonHillary Rodham ClintonTrump and Sessions no longer speaking to one another: report Top aides urging Trump to stop public criticism of Sessions: report Poll: Nearly three-quarters of US Muslims view Trump as unfriendly to them MORE’s decisions, but rather than address the consequences of her actions she chooses to obfuscate the truth and deflect her poor judgment back onto Donald TrumpDonald TrumpWhy Donald Trump flipped a Dem county in blue Connecticut Dem rep: Trump can't deliver on promise because of Russia probe Trump turns up heat on AG Sessions over recusal MORE.

Dems have decided the only weapon left in their arsenal is to sling mud at Trump and hope it sticks. In doing so, they have opened the door for Americans to take a closer look at Hillary’s record on women’s rights, and her husband’s actions of engaging in sexual acts with a young female intern inside the White House Oval Office.

In the case of women’s rights, Secretary Clinton’s foreign policy decisions to support an Islamist-led revolution in Libya has left a trail of destruction to the hard-earned gains of Muslim women seeking a better future free from repression.

During the years following the lifting of the U.S. sanctions in 2004, I witnessed the emergence of liberalization policies towards women’s rights in Libya. Libyan women were coming together to raise their collective voice demanding their rightful place in society, and in 2005 held the first women’s empowerment symposium in the history of the nation.

It was a historic event that I both supported, and spoke at. In the months leading up to the event, I had the fortuitous opportunity to speak to Senator Clinton in the Senate Dining Room, and personally deliver an invitation to be the keynote speaker. To my surprise, Hillary Clinton said “no”, and declined to support the event despite the attendance of senior officials from the State Department and leading female academics from major U.S. universities.

Instead of supporting women’s rights in Libya, some six years later, Secretary Clinton would choose to support an Islamist-led revolution in Libya. Secretary Clinton put politics above the interests of women’s rights and the consequences have been dire for millions of Muslim women.

As reported by the New York Times February 27, 2016 in an article, Hillary Clinton, ‘Smart Power’ and a Dictator’s Fall, “Her [Secretary Clinton] conviction would be critical in persuading Mr. Obama to join allies in bombing Colonel Qaddafi’s forces. In fact, Mr. Obama’s defense secretary, Robert M. Gates, would later say that in a 51-49 decision, it was Mrs. Clinton’s support that put the ambivalent President over the line. This is the story of how a woman whose Senate vote for the Iraq war may have doomed her first presidential campaign [2008] nonetheless doubled down and pushed for military action in another Muslim country.”

The media needs to do its job, and be fair and balanced in their reporting.

Stephanie M. Jason is a North Africa and Middle East expert, and a proud supporter of women’s rights.


 

The views expressed by Contributors are their own and are not the view of The Hill.