The book on Richard Clarke

Richard Clarke, President Bush's former adviser on cybersecurity, and an expert on counterterrorism, speaks during an interview in Boston in 2002.

Minutes after the second jetliner hit the World Trade Center on Sept. 11, 2001, Richard A. Clarke recounts in his new book, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice anointed him "crisis manager."

The assignment meant Clarke, the White House counterterrorism adviser, found himself ordering around high-level officials and urging his superiors to ground air traffic, according to his account. Clarke also takes credit for barring President Bush from immediately returning to Washington.

The passage, which opens Clarke's incendiary new book, "Against All Enemies," provides a telling look at Clarke's traits as the nation's longtime counterterrorism czar. It indicates that Rice and other senior officials had so much confidence in Clarke, they entrusted him with a key leadership role after the hijackings.

But it also reveals a hard-charging style and a penchant for self-promotion that has earned him many enemies over the years, and which has given ammunition to his critics in recent days.

"Dick certainly did infuriate a lot of his interagency colleagues with his take-no-prisoners style," said Daniel Benjamin, a counterterrorism official in the Clinton White House who is now a senior fellow at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "But that was one of the things that made him valuable to his masters and to the political leadership. . . . He broke a lot of crockery, but Dick's mastery of the bureaucracy was almost unrivaled in the 1990s."

AP file The jacket of Richard A. Clarke’s “Against All Enemies.” Clarke, a White House advisor who raised warnings about Islamic terrorism, is scheduled to testify before the 9/11 Commission on Tuesday.

Strong opinions are the norm when it comes to Dick Clarke. A 30-year veteran bureaucrat, Clarke rose to the uppermost ranks of the national security establishment under presidents of both parties but also managed to anger numerous colleagues with his brusque style and bursts of temper. His previous boss, former national security adviser Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, has said he regularly had to turn down demands from colleagues that Clarke be fired.

Clarke's brash manner is on full display in "Against All Enemies," a searing portrait of missteps and misjudgments in the war on terror. While laying some blame on the former Bush and Clinton administrations, Clarke is most explicit in his criticism of George W. Bush and his top advisers, particularly Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld and his deputy, Paul D. Wolfowitz. They are portrayed as indifferent to al Qaeda but obsessed with Iraq and Saddam Hussein, even in the wake of attacks carried out by Osama bin Laden's terrorist organization.

Through it all, Clarke portrays himself as a kind of unheeded Paul Revere, warning a succession of leaders about the threat posed by bin Laden and other Islamic terrorists but frequently ignored or marginalized in his calls for drastic action.

‘You can’t accuse him of being passive or too liberal on foreign policy. He’s very abrasive and aggressive and pushes his point of view very hard.’

He also has chosen to release his book and to sit for a lengthy "60 Minutes" interview, on the eve of hearings today and Wednesday by the independent commission investigating the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks. Clarke, who left the Bush administration last year after a public demotion, is a scheduled witness.

The timing is classic Clarke, according to many who know him well. Former colleagues say Clarke is a wily tactician in the political world of Washington and would be well aware of the firestorm he would cause by the release of his book during a presidential campaign.

Most acquaintances do not regard him as a partisan. Clarke was viewed as a hawk and "true believer" by many within the Clinton administration, and Clarke himself says he is an independent who is registered as a Republican.

"You can't accuse him of being passive or too liberal on foreign policy," said Vince Cannistraro, a former CIA official who worked with Clarke in the Reagan years. "He's very abrasive and aggressive and pushes his point of view very hard."

But White House spokesman Scott McClellan noted yesterday that Clarke is a close friend of former counterterrorism official Rand Beers, who is an adviser to Sen. John F. Kerry's presidential campaign, and teaches a course with him.

Phyllis Oakley, who headed the Intelligence and Research Bureau in the State Department during the Clinton administration, described Clarke as someone who "could get things done on peacekeeping, organizing the military because he knew where to go in the Pentagon." At that time, she added, Clinton's two national security advisers, Berger and Anthony Lake, "didn't know how to line up the troops."

The allegations in Clarke's book getting the most attention center on the current Bush administration, including claims that Bush, Wolfowitz and others urged him to find an Iraqi connection to the terrorist attacks despite a clear lack of evidence. Clarke wrote that "I grew increasingly concerned that too many of my fellow citizens were being misled." Clarke wrote that he "began to feel an obligation to write what I knew."

‘If Dick Clarke had such grave concerns, why wait so long? Why wait until the election?’

McClellan dismissed Clarke's criticisms yesterday and said he "conveniently" released his book in the middle of the campaign season. "If Dick Clarke had such grave concerns, why wait so long?" McClellan said. "Why wait until the election?"

Clarke also takes issue with previous administrations. He criticizes the first Bush administration for not taking action in 1991 after Saddam Hussein brutally put down a Shiite uprising in Iraq.

And in 1993, Clarke writes, he wanted the Clinton administration to undertake a much more vigorous bombing campaign in response to the attempted assassination of former president George H.W. Bush, a plot he claims to have called to the attention of the White House.

He discloses how he supervised the response, which ended up being a strike against Iraqi intelligence headquarters in Baghdad, but adds that he was "initially disappointed that the retaliation had been so small, that targets had been taken off the list, and that the raid was scheduled in the middle of the night when few Iraqi intelligence officers would be present."

I know this is a few days old but it gives a good summary of why Clarke is not to be believed.

The bolding is mine.

The article was written earlier and then updated on 3/22/2004. Wonder if we can get the original article anywhere?

Has anyone previously heard that it was Clarke that barred Dubya from returning to Washington on 9/11?

Clarke himself says he is an independent who is registered as a Republican.

We now know this is a lie.

At that time, she added, Clinton's two national security advisers, Berger and Anthony Lake, "didn't know how to line up the troops."

Any more info on this anywhere?

Proof that Clarke shpuld not be believed?

What more is needed than the fact that he was one of Willie's filthy and corrupt White House sewer dwellers? Bush deserves what he gets for not purging this cra[ weasel on day one!!

So, Clarke was both an unheeded Paul Revere and a master of bureaucracy....Those two aspects of his personality seem contradictory.

He broke a lot of crockery, but Dick's mastery of the bureaucracy was almost unrivaled in the 1990s

Clarke portrays himself as a kind of unheeded Paul Revere, warning a succession of leaders about the threat posed by bin Laden and other Islamic terrorists but frequently ignored or marginalized in his calls for drastic action.

Samuel R. "Sandy" Berger, has said he regularly had to turn down demands from colleagues that Clarke be fired.

Just watching this guy made me wonder about this. The best discriptive word I could come up with after watching him, his expressions and mannerisms was "prig". he is affectedly arrogant, selfrightous, and self promoting as the article states. I have had to fire people like this for their inability to work with others and backstabing. The always turn vicious when confronted with any personal inadequacies.

So true...I think one of the reasons his accusations have gotten so little traction with the public is that almost every workplace has an arrogant little-know-it-all twerp like this who blames everyone else for his firing when he gets cashiered. Clarke exudes arrogance and self-promotion...and the American public is a much better judge of personal character than politicians think.

Now before you say, "yea, but they elected Clinton twice", consider this:

1. Look at who he ran against.

2. He never got over 50% of the vote.

3. The reason Gore couldn't win, even with a fantastic economy, was his relationship with Clinton. And don't think Gore doesn't know it, and blame Clinton...

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.