Reading between the lines : Bush vs Clarke

Clarke admitted he was frustrated with the Bush Administration for their lack of action on al Qaeda. He pressed them for a meeting and he never got it. He rubbed a few people in the Administration the wrong way.

He had applied for the #2 position at Homeland Security but it was given to a political appointee, Hutchison (Asa?)of Arkansas. His "outspokenness" seems to have reflected poorly on his review. Because, in June of 2001, pre-9/11, he stepped down as terrorism chief and offered to take a position as head of "cyber security", to which he was assigned. He mentioned on MTP that his Chief of Staff was also frustrated with the lack of attention that the Bush people were giving to al Qaeda and terrorism.

It appears, in my opinion, that there were ill feelings between Clarke and the Bush WH before 9/11. And Bush refused to reward anyone that had the temerity to challenge his decisions (or Cheney's decisions). Clarke was on the outside looking in before 9/11 happened.

Ergo, the writing of the book. The White House editing that took out many of the points that were in the original copy and taking a longer than usual time in the process. This was an atypical family feud between Republicans. After all, Clarke was not a registered Democrat.

But, in the final analysis, it took something like that to bring the truth out about how the Bush White House really works. He knew they would come after him with every weapon in their arsenal. Yet, he felt betrayed by them. And he let it all hang out.

Clarke requested to be transferred to CyberSecurity BEFORE 911, well before Dept. of Homeland Security was formed. He was frustrated at the admin's "lackadaisacal" approach to anti-terrorism and wanted to work some place he could have some effect.

Thanks for the edit. :)

It seems to me he was treated exactly like O'Neill. If you weren't fully on board re Iraq then you were dissed and your access was diminished.

I also think that, exactly like O'Neill, it was not a personal thing but more a matter of public service. The Bushcheney misadministration is appalling to sensible conservatives and they feel obliged to alert the public.

Clarke was a loyal bureaucrat but he was pushed to the point to which he had no choice but to respond.