[Williams]

One problem with Clarke is he presents so many good targets.

Did anyone see him deny wanting the Homeland Security job, although he admitted to being interviewed for the job?

He really displayed lunacy when he held up a sloppy post card goodbye from President Bush that was embarrassing for someone who worked in the White House for 12 years or more. Yet he bragged "this is not the ordinary goodbye you get." It was embarrassing - for him.

Clarke desperately is trying to get out his real message - that we shouldn't have invaded Iraq. Fortunately, the vast majority of Americans, including Powell, Rumsfeld, Rice & Bush, don't agree with him on that.

He took credit for every anti-terrorism act of the Bush administration and claimed the Administration and especially Rice deserve no credit. How does he figure?

He claims he's going to donate to the 9-11 families but of course can't say how much and has to keep most of the money because the vile Bush White House will destroy his career.

His proudest achievement was being insubordinate on 9-12 and refusing the President's order to investigate whether the attacks had any link to Iraq. Mr. know it all just knew it was Al Queda with no other involvement. Even the Washington Post says Clarke was off base.

There's the little matter of leaving a sensitive White House position in time of war and writing a "tell all" book about private national security conversations.

Rumsfeld and Wolfowitz want to hit Iraq on 9-12. Bush asks CLARKE to investigate if there was any Iraq link. A guy known to aggressively dispute the existence of any such link. Now, why would Clarke object to being given that assignment, when it left Clarke in control of the result??

And finally, why does Clarke never emphasize the result of his investigation? I assume Clarke found no link, and Bush moved against Afghanistan, not Iraq. The Iraq war was never justified based on a 9-11 link. So Clarke's problem with that is exactly what?

[Howie66]

Here's another question that anyone has yet to ask the legend-in-his-own-mind, Clarke: "IF YOU were so certain that al Quaeda was the most IMMEDIATE THREAT to the United States when President George W. Bush took office in January, 2001; EXACTLY who did you advise of this and just EXACTLY when did you make this threat known?

How come this hasn't been asked by Russert or anybody else?

[Freee-dame]

because the vile Bush White House will destroy his career.

He just RETIRED after 30 years of government employment. He gets retirement benefits. His career is over.

[Spotsy]

Good post from you.

Clarke & Company complain that Bush, Rummy, Wolfie were so obsessed with Iraq that they had Saddam on the brain on 9/11. Well, Clarke was so obsessed with bin Laden that he immediately attributed the attacks to him.

It was perfectly reasonable, indeed, only logical to question on 9/11, "Who did this to us?" Assumptions aren't good enough.

If Clinton refused to retaliate for the attack on the USS Cole until the FBI could prove beyond any doubt that al Qaeda was involved, then why was Bush expected to assume and strike immediately at bin Laden on 9/11?

---

Mansoor Ijaz says Dicky Clarke personally blocked efforts to have bin Laden extradited.

Maybe Dicky was thinking that he personally had more to gain by prolonging the problem - keeping bin Laden free to cause more trouble - the more trouble, the more Dicky's expertise would be needed.