The Man Who Protects America From Terrorism

The New York Times ^ | February 1, 1999 | TIM WEINER

[petitfour]

WASHINGTON -- Richard Clarke is the White House terrorism czar. His stock in trade is the stuff of techno-thrillers -- biological bombs in the Wall Street subway, chemical clouds of death in the Pentagon parking lot, cyberwar attacks crippling the nation's computers.

Pale as skim milk, his once-red hair gone white at 48, he works long days and nights in Oliver North's old office at the National Security Council, keeping a profile so low that almost no one outside his top-secret world knows he exists.

As chairman of the government's chief counterterrorism group for the past seven years, he has become what John le Carre calls an "intellocrat" -- a gray baron who seems to command nothing more than his desk, yet waves a wand and sends soldiers, guns, money and spies around the world.

Clarke inspires ferocious loyalty from friends and fierce enmity from foes inside the government. He wins praise for getting things done in secret -- and criticism for exactly the same. At the National Security Council, where he landed in 1992 after losing his State Department job in a bitter battle over Israel's misuse of American military technology, he can operate without outside oversight so long as he has President Clinton's confidence.

[petitfour]

This article is fairly old. It does not link directly to the NYTimes, so if it needs to be deleted, then so be it. I'm not sure why cornell is keeping archives of the NYTimes available online, but this article is certainly good background info on Clarke.

[alex]

It has to important tidbits:

1. He was focusing mostly on cyberspace attack as of 2/1999 and he had proved being wrong.

2. He was the only holdover embraced by Clinton administration.

[petitfour]

The last line is the most ominous to me:

Clarke joined the National Security Council staff under Bush. He was one of the only holdovers embraced by the Clinton administration. After seven years, he has placed proteges in key diplomatic and intelligence positions, creating a network of loyalty and solidifying his power.

[OldFriend]

Trouble is, under Clarke's watch we lost two African embassies and the USS Cole. The groundwork was laid for 9/11 and this man was...........anyone know if he had an under the desk assistant that kept him distracted?

[mrsmith]

Nice!

Clarke seems to have always had exceptional cooperation from the media.

[jcb8199]

"An attack on American cyberspace is an attack on the United States, just as much as a landing on New Jersey," he said. "The notion that we could respond with military force against a cyber-attack has to be accepted."

"However," he added, "a preemptive strike against a known terrorist and threat to our future security is not acceptable."


........

[petitfour]

I didn't catch that preemptive strike bit. No wonder Clarke resigned over Iraq.

[jcb8199]

I added it as an addendum...tongue-in-cheek...

[petitfour]

Well, no wonder I didn't notice it before. :)

[Jackson Brown]

This article is fairly old. It does not link directly to the NYTimes, so if it needs to be deleted, then so be it. I'm not sure why cornell is keeping archives of the NYTimes available online, but this article is certainly good background info on Clarke.

This should NOT be deleted. The only thing you might have done differently (better?) would have been to have it listed as "New York Times via Cornell University"

[Jackson Brown]

KEY quote from part of article not posted:

[On why Clarke was forced out of State Department]

""In 1992, he [Clark] was accused by the State Department's inspector general of looking the other way as Israel transferred American military technology to China.
"There was an allegation that we hadn't investigated a huge body of evidence that the Israelis were involved in technology transfers," Clarke said. "In fact, we had investigated it. I knew more about it than anyone. We found one instance where it was true. The Israelis had taken aerial refueling technology we sold them and sold it to a Latin American country. We caught them, and they admitted they had done it."

He added: "The administration wanted to put heat on the Israeli government to create an atmosphere in which the incumbent government might lose an election. The bottom line was I wasn't going to lie. I wasn't going to go along with an administration strategy to pressure the Israeli government."

Sherman Funk, the inspector general who accused Clarke, remembered the case differently.

"He's wrong," said Funk, the State Department's inspector general from 1987 to 1994. "He's being very disingenuous. Dick Clarke was unilaterally adopting a policy that was counter to the law and counter to the avowed policy of the government. It was not up to him to make that determination. Almost all the people in his own office disagreed with him. In the end, he had to leave the State Department." "

[Pres Raygun]

Good catch. I like everyone else have been trying to figure out this guy's motivation. The picture that is forming in my mind from this article and other sources is that Clarke is simply a Machiavellian power hungry egomaniacal nutcase.

[Gothmog]

Yeah, like that guy Cressey who now works for the Dems on NBC

[Spotsy]

You have found some great articles about Clark!

[Irish Eyes]

Clarke joined the National Security Council staff under Bush. He was one of the only holdovers embraced by the Clinton administration. After seven years, he has placed proteges in key diplomatic and intelligence positions, creating a network of loyalty and solidifying his power.

That was my exact feeling when I read this...... Ominous

[Terry Mross]

Well, well, well. He's the one who talked Clinton into sending cruise missiles to try to get Bin Laden. And W called his plan "firing a ten million dollar missile up a camel's butt". I think that upset Dickie a little bit.

And, he got upset that he doesn't get to sit between Colin and Rummy.

Bush the Elder shouldn't have kept him and neither should W. The nut didn't fall far from the tree on this one.

[AmeriBrit]

BTTT

[Enchante]

How very interesting..... Clarke the big man on terrorism but WTC93, Khobar Towers, the '98 Embassy bombings, and the USS Cole bombing all occurred on his watch (not to mention OKC, but that's a lengthy debate of its own). Not to say Clarke may not have been more concerned about terrorism issues than others in the Clintonista years, but maybe he just wasn't very effective at getting the Clintonistas to recognize and deal with the threats (of course that may have been an impossible task, so maybe Clarke shouldn't be judged too harshly b/c he could not get Bill Clinton to stop thinking every minute of day and night about satisfying "wee willie").

It sounds from one of his quotes as though he was mainly interested in protecting Israel's Labor Party govt in 1992 (it was PM Rabin then, I believe). I am a staunch supporter of Israel, but never on this technology transfer to others..... most especially not to the PRC!!! It's impossible to know all the facts from this thread, but if Clarke's main concern was to oppose everyone in the US govt. who really wanted to pressure Israel to end such illicit technology transfers of OUR technologies, because he didn't want to see Israel's liberal Labor Party govt. fall over it, then that would indeed make him a very typical Clintonista, even before the Clintons took over! It was 1992 and Clarke was trying to prevent the State Dept. from insisting upon strict controls of US defense technologies?? I'd say that would make me distrust the nobel Richard Clarke even more than I already do.