Please guys, cut the political BS

By now, you've probably read the stories on new warnings of possible future terrorist attacks on America, specifically important financial sites such as the New York Stock Exchange or the World Bank. That a combination of the Pakistani and U.S. military and intelligence services have recently been able to capture important al-Quaida operatives and retrieve a wealth of documents from their computers is crucial. But to hear politicians and pundits dismiss the recent security clampdowns in Washington and New York as unnecessary because much of the intelligence was supposedly old is patently ridiculous at best.

The New York Times published a very good story on this. It points out that new intelligence from other sources backs up what was originally discovered, and supports the need for heightened security at important financial locations in New York, New Jersey and Washington. What upsets me is that some critics of this are trying to use it for political gain, and are casting FUD on the extra security precautions as being politically motivated.

While Department of Homeland Security chief Tom Ridge was a Republican appointee, I think he made it clear that his motivations are anything but political. When people's lives are at stake, when important institutions are threatened, that potentially hurts all Americans. I believe him when he expressed concerns with the threats. And so should the Democrats, pundits, journalists and other critics of the recent heightened security.

I am reminded of the criticism and pressure that NASA endured prior to the tragic launch of the Challenger space shuttle. In the days before the ill-fated launch, conditions at Cape Canaveral were unsuitable. The weather was unusually cold, with freezing temperatures. NASA officials tried to make that clear. Yet, the journalists peppered NASA with pointed questions on when the launch would take place. I believe that NASA launched Challenger in colder weather than should have been allowed, in no small part because of the pressure put to bear by journalists.

That's not to say that NASA was without blame. Anything but. Tragically, the facts bear this out. Yet the pundits and journalists pressured NASA to make a bad decision. But these same people feel no sense of guilt.

Cut to today. The intelligence community has fresh and solid evidence of terrorist plans in an advanced stage. While no one can say when the terrorist strike is planned, it's obvious that something may be afoot. That the White House went public on this is, in my opinion, a good thing, as it makes clear that al-Qaida's cover was blown, and the advantage of surprise may be lost. While that's good for some political points, to focus on this is trivial. What is important, and is something Mr. Kerry and the Democrats should acknowledge, is that the security of the United States is in everyone's interest. And the subject of a strong terrorist threat should stand above politics.

When our safety is at stake, I don't want my security put in play for some candidate's political gain, regardless of what party they're for. Our security is more important than politics. I hope those entrusted to be leaders clearly understand that.