Book Review of Against All Enemies, by Richard Clarke

Intellectual Conservative.com ^ | April.8,2004 | Geoffrey Riklin

[Wolfstar]

Who knows, maybe the movie offer was the "better deal" I talked about. It's quite reasonable to be suspicious of possible bribery when someone like Clarke does a 180-degree turn in their point of view. Some FReepers like to remind us that Clarke was just a 30-year bureaucrat, as thought that explains his intensity. I, on the other hand, say yeah, 30 years. Means he never made really big money and now's his chance to become a multimillionaire, plus to get his 15 minutes of fame. Judas was not unique to the story of Jesus.

[Reagan Man]

Thanks for the rational reply.

I don't think many FReepers, or for that matter many Americans will be reading Clarke's book. But it's important for folks to understand that a lot of what Clarke put on paper, has little to do with the truth. Clarke's words are unsupported accusations at best and in many cases outright lies. It's obvious Clarke was both monetarily and politically inspired to write this book.

Clarke should be hounded and ridiculed for writing this book every waking hour of his life. ;^)

[Reagan Man]

Sometimes sarcasm cuts both ways. ;^)

[an amused spectator]

Post-NewsMedia Conservative History ping - Against All Truth - A Review Of Dickie Clarke's Pack Of Lies

Now to Against All Enemies. On nearly the last page, 289, he reveals that "[t]his book is...from my memory." This after he has quoted other people scores of times. Throughout the book he says that Person X said such-and-such, and surrounds the alleged statement with quotation marks. To use quotation marks does not mean that the person in question said more-or-less such-and-such, but that he said precisely those words. Anything less than the precise, verbatim quotation of a statement means that quotation marks cannot be used. Clarke breaks this sacred rule constantly. In addition, virtually every person he quotes talks like virtually every other person. How odd. In my eyes this gross fault renders the entire book suspect.

On, Off, or grab it for a Media Shenanigans/Schadenfreude ping:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~anamusedspectator/

[an amused spectator]

What took place as 2001 went along? What information and warnings did Clarke receive? He says that "[b]y late June, Tenet and I were convinced that a major series of attacks was about to come. ÔIt's my sixth sense, but I feel it coming. This is going to be the big one,' Tenet told me." [p.235]

I guessed last week's winning lottery numbers before they were drawn, but no one believes me.

[mrustow]

Yeah well it didn't take long for a movie company to pick up the rights to the book :(

And what the hell kind of movie can you make from this garbage? We're not exactly in Seven Days of the Condor territory here.

[SLB]

I am on page 40 of the book and have hit the point where each page is a gag. The first chapter sounded like something Tom Clancy would write, in fact Clancy uses the same name for one of his heros. Maybe Dick Clarke is wanting to see himself in a Clancy noval as - super hero!

I find it hard to believe all the intimate conversations he relates and as far as all the quotes go, I thought he must have kept a pretty good journal to remember the exact words said by all he worked with on 9-11.

The book could actually be slightly credible if it were not for the obvious axe he is grinding with the two Bush administrations. As far as his comments on past presidents who did nothing, I notice the name Jimmy Carter is only found in one place in the book. No mention of the failed foreign policies of that administration.