Clarke
March 24th, 2004
More on Richard Clarke (mentioned Sunday
in advance of his 60′ interview): A Salon
interview, and Slate on why we should believe him. From
that article:
There were good things and dubious things about Clarke, traits that inspired
both admiration and leeriness. The former: He was very smart, a highly skilled
(and utterly nonpartisan) analyst, and he knew how to get things done in a
calcified bureaucracy. The latter: He was arrogant, made no effort to disguise
his contempt for those who disagreed with him, and blatantly maneuvered around
all obstacles to make sure his views got through.
Doesn’t sound like the kind of guy who’s lying about being a squeaky wheel
about Al-Qaeda before 9/11.