The Scoop: Politicians squabble while terrorists plot
Visions of airplanes crashing into the World Trade Center came to mind earlier this week when Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge announced specific U.S. targets were at risk for a terrorist attack.
The announcement listed five financial buildings by name in New York City, New Jersey and Washington. Employees at those buildings were no doubt pondering whether to show up for work the next day. Don’t count on me being around if the government announces the Southern Standard as a prime terrorist target.
Streets were closed, security was raised to high risk, and people near the five announced targets feared for their safety. Then it was learned the intelligence surrounding those terrorist targets was gathered many years ago — possibly even before Sept. 11, 2001.
With that information in hand, it didn’t take long for the Democrats to begin slinging mud. Said Howard Dean, who imploded during his presidential bid, “Every time something happens that’s not good for President Bush, he plays this trump card, which is terrorism. How much of this is real and how much of this is politics? I suspect there’s some of both.”
The Democratic consensus is the Bush administration opted to release such information this week to drain attention from presidential hopeful John Kerry. The Democrats further contend the announcement has done nothing but create unnecessary panic.
The White House countered by saying, in addition to the old information, a new stream of intelligence was discovered last week which indicates the threats are indeed pressing. Ridge stressed the announcement was made with personal safety in mind and said, “This is a time when we have to talk to America about the threat.”
I say both sides deserve a kick in the rump for a number of reasons. Now let me count the ways.
First, it’s a pity something as vital as national security has been reduced to a game of political finger-pointing. We’re talking about major financial institutions in densely populated areas as targets. The potential loss of life could stretch into the thousands.
But instead of cooperating for the good of the country, our leaders are too busy with election-year politics. When you look at Bush, Kerry and so many members of Congress, it really is easy to pose the question, “Is this the best our country has to offer?”
Second, I’d think the Democrats would devote more energy to the war on terror than the war on Republicans. If Kerry is serious about following the recommendations of the 9/11 commission, he should be applauding the White House’s announcement.
Americans should be notified about possible terrorist threats. Such information shouldn’t be locked away in the government’s room of secrets. I know I want any and all information released about possible terrorist attacks in Middle Tennessee.
And finally, if the Bush administration is being so noble, why did it take years to tell the American people about such detailed al-Qaida threats? We’re not talking about sketchy reports. The terrorists had exact information about the financial buildings such as the thickness of their windows and the number of security guards at various times of the day.
This, more than anything, should show the events of Sept. 11 were no fluke and not the work of some makeshift group of rebels. Al-Qaida is a well-financed, global organization fully capable of repeating such a strike on U.S. soil.
Maybe if our politicians took time away from their first-grade name calling, we could make strides in the war on terror instead of making accusations.
James Clark is editor of the Standard. He can be reached at 473-2191 or by e-mail at [email protected].