GROUND ZER0, New York, N.Y.--Jan. 13, 2004 -- I shudder sometimes when I think of children looking up to government leaders as the source of parenthood.  I wonder how many of them see Terrorism unfolding when gaze upon the antics of our supposed "Sentinels of Children's Vigilance."

       Take for example the recent case of Paul O'Neill, former U.S. Treasury Secretary.   Mr. O'Neill was fired by President George Bush for disagreeing with fundamental policies of the Administration.  In retaliation, some allege, he was the main source of  a book by Wall Street journalist, Ron Suskind, that criticized the Administration.  He claims that President Bush was after Saddam Hussein even prior to the attack on Nine Eleven, disregarding facts in Bush's thirst to revenge the near death attack on his father.
         Part of O'Neill's promotion of the book included an interview on 60 Minutes, in which a "secret" document was shown as part of 19,000 pages of U.S. documents Mr. O'Neill used as book background.   O'Neill sat on the National Security Council and had access to highly sensitive U.S. policy and information during his tenure.
        The question is:  Did Mr. O'Neill take classified documents and use them to help promote his vendetta?

        Currently, there seems to be a flap about whether the documents were classified or not.   The one shown on national television had the words "secret" clearly stamped on the document, however, some claim it was only a cover sheet and did not include the sensitive document.
        But, to a child hearing the news, or watching the arguments over whether Mr. O'Neill abused his office by using secret documents, the issue mucks up the idea of pure leadership.    The child sees a man accused of endangering his family--the United States--of violating the trust of his office.
        Our political leaders, as with all government officials, take a pledge to defend the "Constitution" from all "foreign and domestic" enemies.    In other words, a Pledge of National Vigilance is taken.
         There is an assumption within that Pledge that the leaders of our nation are duty-bound to protect not just the document embodied in the Constitution, but the safety and security of the 100 million families that comprise this country.
         Individually, they become by default, Mothers and Fathers of Vigilance, subscribed to keep the Beast of Terror at bay with their Swords and Shields of Vigilance.
         The Beast of Terror uses three weapons to undermine the safety and security of his enemies--Fear, Intimidation and Complacency.
         All three of these demons have been unleashed by the stir about Paul O'Neill's use of classified documents.

         Fear is created that perhaps Mr. O'Neill leaked information to people who might use that against our national security.   Intimidation is fostered by the idea that a man who served as a Sentinel of Vigilance would suddenly turn and attack his nation by attempting to undermine its leadership for pure selfish reasons.    And, Complacency comes into play because the odds are that because Mr. O'Neill is a politician that he will be treated with kid gloves and no penalty will be issued to him because the "wolves" don't eat their own kind.
          A child, however, may not see this from as many facets as an adult.   The child may be simply ask:  "Why did a man take secrets and use them for revenge?"
         Credibility is vital to building trust in a child's mind.   Children want to feel safe and secure in the arms of their "trusted servants," the parents and guardians of their land.
         When vitriolic attacks are made undermining the credibility of national leaders, as those presented by Mr. O'Neill, the child wonders whether the "Parents of the Nation" are more interested in themselves than in protecting the children, the families.
         I have often wondered why politicians survive by "assassination."   Political assassination is the trend.    Mr. O'Neill is not alone in his use of Political Terrorism to destroy another in an attempt to build one's own self.

        Democratic Presidential candidate Howard Dean is currently under heavy attack by contenders vying for his party's nomination.    Accusations are being hurled by the contenders against him every moment because he currently is the leading force.   A child listening to or overhearing conversations about the campaign is like the child in Iraq standing between the crossfire of troops and  Terrorists.   The innocents eventually become the victims.

          The same problems of being caught in the cross-fire of authority comes to a child when parents fight.  The Voices of an angry mother or father berating one another spill under a child's door, seep into the soul of the child and make he or she fearful that the child is unprotected by its "Higher Authority," that the child is naked and alone in a world where Beasts of Terror roam looking for wounded souls to harvest.
          While the row currently being played out between former Secretary of the Treasury and the President may seem insignificant to many, it's not when you add up all the degrees of Terrorism that ooze through the pores of a child's being.
           The difference between parents fighting and Presidents and former Cabinet Members dueling, or presidential candidates back-biting one another, creates a world of cannibalism for a child.   A child begins to think the world is not about love and caring for one another, but instead about turning on the hand that feeds you, about snarling and ripping apart anyone who stands in your way.
            If Vigilance has a great secret, it's not about creating more Terrorism under the disguise of politics or argument.    It's not about ignoring the impact such Terrorism--the Fear, Intimidation and Complacency--can create within a child's sense of well being.

           Children's minds are simple calculators.   If the head of the child's nation can be attacked by someone charged with protecting the nation as a Sentinel of Vigilance, and use state's secrets to lead that attack, then why not its parents attack each other?    What safety exists for the child?
            Therefore, the next time one looks at the news and hears the diatribes being hurled by political leaders at one another, perhaps instead of thinking it's okay for politicians to attack and destroy each other's character, the viewer might question the right of the politician to present to children a forum of Terrorism.    One might ask:  "Is this an act of the Sentinel of Vigilance or the Beast of Terror?"

            Concurrently, one might well look at his or her behavior around a child and ask the same question.  Are hurling insults and innuendos about another person, directly or indirectly related to the family, creating the bedrock of Terrorism in a child's mind?
             A Sentinel of Vigilance checks his or her tongue at the door leading to the children's ears.