[dogbyte12]

Here is the problem. Richard Clarke covered his butt. Some of his allegations are really unprovable. The others he has witnesses.

But witnesses can only tell you so much. For example, on Sept 12, Clarke claims the president told him to look at links to Iraq. He said that it now appears, in front of witnesses. However, there is nothing to say that President Bush didn't pigeonhole Clarke and say "look at everything, including Iraq". Clarke's book can be both "true" and "false" in that it is misleading. If you have 10 hours of conversation, and you state one snippet, one rant, "off the cuff", it is "true" but not really true.

Clarke has put the W.H. in a bad spot. The only way they can effectively refute him, is to reveal classified info, executive conversations, etc.

[hobbes1]

Here is the problem. Richard Clarke covered his butt. Some of his allegations are really unprovable.

Are you kidding? Clarkes book, is 180 degrees from the Source HE GAVE Richard Miniter, for "Losing Bin Laden".

If any (R) appointee on the Committee had Ball ONE, he would have that book front and center for quizzing Dick Clarke.

Clarkes book by definition makes Clarke a Liar, either TO MINITER or in HIS BOOK.

Miniters book was written Before Clarke had an axe to grind, so you tell me which is more probable.

[StriperSniper]

he only way they can effectively refute him, is to reveal classified info, executive conversations, etc.

Wasn't that Rockey's Intel Memo plan?
(Rhet.)

[Richard Kimball]

It was perfectly reasonable to ask about an Iraq connection. That was the connection 90% of the American public made, and was a reasonable one. When the evidence showed that Afghanistan was a better starting point, we targeted Afghanistan.

[cwb]

One of Clarke's aides was on Scarabrough the other night..who was with him and the president. He did say that Bush told them to look at Iraq...but unlike Clarke who sees a conspiracy, the aide said that Bush wanted them to look at everybody and that he didn't find anything intimidating about Bush's request, and in fact, found it a normal request to what had just happened.

[Howlin]

It also depends on how much of a freak Clarke is -- he probably heard what HE wanted to hear.....Bush saying "Find out what Iraq has to do with this" and him thinking to himself "What? This guy thinks Iraq did this," when all Bush might have been saying was check everything.

I've read some other stuff on the internet about Clarke and cybersecurity. The computer people think he's an absolute paranoid freak. They mock him openly.