----- Original Message ----- From: "Mike Lee" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "'Killer Bs Discussion'" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 26, 2004 11:16 AM Subject: RE: Bush's brand new enemy is the truth
> Clark seems to be imploding. I wouldn't start your happy dance just yet. I don't think this is all that clear. In this morning's paper, he was defended by Powell, saying he was a dedicated public servant. Let me quote from a NY Times story in the Houston Chronicle "In a television interview, Powell said Clarke had 'served his nation very very well' and was 'an expert in these matters' referring to counterterrorism. While saying that Clarke's book is 'not the complete story' Powell said on PBS's NewsHour that he was 'not attributing any bad motives' to Clarke." I've been watching and thinking about Clarke's testimony before the 9/11 panel for the last few days and have come up with a few observations. 1) Clarke is the real thing: a zealot in defending the US against terrorism. There is evidence that he can be abrasive or even rude, but there is more evidence that he is very dedicated to preventing terrorist attacks. Obsessed is a word that I've seen used. 2) He knows his way about Washington. He had to know what the outcome of his book would be....since he knows how much Bush regards loyalty. 3) If he is opposed to the Iraq war because he things it hurts the war on terrorism, then resigning about the time of the start of the Gulf war is consistent with that being the point where he ceased to think he can do more good from the inside...that the President's policy was wrong enough to quit over. 4) If he decided to still "fight the good fight" from the outside, writing a book would be a reasonable action. He needs publicity to make his case and he needs to have his ideas well developed to have a chance to work in opposition to the White House PR machine...which he must know he would trigger. 5) The timing of the book is not unreasonable as far as I can tell. Clarke said it went to the White House for review in the fall and that they didn't rush to vet it. Its amazing that the White House is that compartmentalized, so that the principals were actually surprised by the content. However, I consider that a plus for the White House, since they should not check books for how flattering they are to the President, just whether classified information is contained in the book. 6) The fact that he gave background briefings that accentuated the positive even though he had grave reservations should not be surprising. Even in business, one is expected to accentuate the positive before customers. I have been complemented by customers for being unusually trustworthy, and I've done that. It seems like a pretty thin straw to grasp at. 7) He probably really believes that, while Clinton didn't do enough, he was actually better than Bush at fighting terrorism. 8) He has hung on through repeated requests to fire him. He sounds like someone who is not fun to work with, but someone who is good enough at what they do to get away with a low EQ. 9) He probably was a bit bitter about the whole thing. But, since he is very direct and abrasive, one cannot be certain. Just a few semi-random observations to keep the discussion going. Dan M. _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
