Rating: 
Summary: It's time that the truth be known.
Review: Our government has made a practice out of lying to us for decades. It's just that the Bush Administration is particularly bad at it. When our leaders base their reasons for war upon lies - some which have been told for so long that they become 'truth' to those who don't know better (for example, the gassing of the Kurds in March '88 - the US Army War College found no evidence that Iraq was responsible for such a thing - that in fact, evidence pointed towards IRAN) it takes someone from behind the scenes who feels it's time to break free from the web of lies that have been spun. Richard Clarke felt it was time that the truth be known. The Bush Administration can fuss all they want about this, but the fact of the matter is that the spotlight is now on them, and they've got some answering to do. BTW, Clarke's story was already online in 2002 - the White House sat on the transcript for a long time before giving the *ahem* 'stamp of approval' to this book. http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,333835,00.html
Rating:
Summary: He does have an interesting story to tell
Review: I enjoyed this book so much so that I didn't put it down until I finished. Some of the points he brought up I've read about in various news articles and other books, have helped back up his story. His point about Iraq is a valid one, which only recently became clear to me after coming back home from Iraq, that we turned our attention onto Iraq before even trying to finish the job in Afghanistan.
I do recommend this book highly, but if you are a person who thinks that our administration can do no wrong then this book will not change your mind about the mistakes that they have made. I'm not saying you can't change your mind about the administration, I know I definitely have - but that took a trip to Iraq, a single rocket attack at our work center, David Kay not finding any WMDs and a LOT of internet research when I got back home started my questioning why we really went into Iraq.
Rating:
Summary: Credible and disturbing
Review: For all the hoopla, the Bush administration's lack of sufficient attention to terrorism is a relatively small, but compelling, part of "Against All Enemies". The larger portion of the book is a fascinating, intimate history of terrorism against the United States and America's response to it across several administrations, told by an eye-witness to history. Clark's accusations against the Bush administration are important to consider in an election year with the President running on his anti-terrorism competence. However, the longer history of American administrations and anti-terrorism gives the book a depth that makes it valuable apart from its timeliness to the election, because terrorism is and will continue to be a compelling public policy issue, and informed Americans will want to know more about the history and evolution of anti-terrorism in this county. We are fortunate to have a book as lucid and compelling as this to inform us. The book discusses events large and small -- as large as the emergence of terrorism in the Middle East and as small as the covert snatch of the assassin who murdered CIA employees outside CIA headquarters. Particularly effecting, if of no international or national importance, was an incident from the goundbreaking of the Lockerbie memorial cairn in Ireland. President Clinton turned over the first shovel-full of dirt with a five year old boy who had lost his father in that act of terrorism. Then he whispered something in the boy's ear. Clarke asked the boy's mother what the President had said. Clinton had said, "My father died before I was born too. Be good to your Mom." Say what you will about Clinton, he knew the right word at the right time. I have heard Clarke say that he was critical in his book of the Clinton administration. This is true. He fervently argued for cruise missile attacks against the al Qaeda training camps in Afghanistan but was overruled. He argued for a stronger response against the Iraqi assassination attempt against George H.W. Bush but was overruled. However, he largely approved of the growing attentiveness of the Clinton administration to the growing threat of terrorism and he approved of the Clinton administration's activism and innovation against terrorism. It is clear that Clarke admired Cliton personally for his grasp of terrorism policy and for his willingness to act boldly. Then the administation changed. The Bush administration did not "get it". The concept that al Qaeda was an urgent threat was foreign to them, and they significantly scaled back the progress that had been made against terrorism in Clinton's administration. Call this democracy. The American people had changed horses, as is their inviolable right, but the inexperience of the new leadership in terrorism matters created dissonance between the threat as perceived by holdovers from the Clinton administration and the threat as perceived by the new leaders of the Free World. Clarke and others who had developed a deep appreciation of the threat posed by al Qaeda became the Cassandras of the new administration. Then came 9/11. When Clarke evaluates the Bush administration's response to 9/11, the gloves come off. America largely perceives Bush's response as resolute, but Clarke paints it as floundering. I am not surprised by the Bush administration's no-holds-barred, take-no-prisoners response to Clarke. His critique is devastating. To Clarke, Bush's expensive, distracting invasion of Iraq only undermined the security of this country while it drew resources away from the pursuit of America's imminent enemy, al Qaeda. Afghanistan should have been the focus of America's efforts against terrorism, according to Clarke. Instead, our efforts there were half-baked and tepid. Afghanistan was a case of opportunities lost. Clarke's evaluation of our current readiness to respond to terror is chilling and credible. "Against All Enemies" is timely and insightful. I would hope its wisdom would be contemplated by all thoughtful Americans.
Rating:
Summary: Republicans: Spare Us Clinton Voters Your Diatribes
Review: There are a couple of reasons why Mr. Clark is right on the money here. First, as Republicans continue to tighten their grip on the IMF (International Monetary Fund), they are proving to the world that their main goal is to put control of the levers of production such that only WHITE MALES will ultimately be driving the purchasing decisions that fuel our economy. From there, there is no doubt that the Republicans next step will be to place ugly women, children, and old people in CONCENTRATION CAMPS so that these pigs can have their way in the world. Clinton was our savoir! We were his children! Now Bush is in the white house and now our daddy has been turned into a BAD DADDY! Oh, daddy Bill, we were all VERY BAD for electing an evil Republican. Can you ride out to us on your white horse and glistening armor and be our daddy again? We're democrats. We can't think for ourselves. We need you, daddy!!!
Rating: 
Summary: Never let facts get in the way!
Review: Clarke and Kerry both seem to have a problem with their own statements and history. I advise both to figure out who and what they are before going public. It is starting to feel like Clinton all over again...
Rating:
Summary: We really need a scale starting with zero on this trash!
Review: How can Mr. Clarke claim that he was the expert and not take the responsibility for being such a failure? Interesting that he waited almost two years before he decided to write his book since it is obvious that he is unable to actually remember what he said before being dismissed. The mistake made by the White House was to keep the people from the last administration.
Rating:
Summary: Another potboiler written by a publicity hound
Review: As some other astute reviewers have noted here, isn't it interesting how Mr. Clarke has changed his opinion on 911 during an election year. Where was this infomration nearly three years ago Mr. Clarke? Hmmmmmmmmm? Methinks you are disgusting turd only looking for publicity, to make a quick buck and to attack a President who was heroic in his efforts to do what never would have happened if his PREDECESSOR had done his job RE: Losing Bin Laden. I highly recommend that readers read Losing Bin Laden which tells why Bill Clinton is responsible for 911, not G.W. Bush. Mr. Clarke should be ashamed of himself for outright lying but I doubt if he has any shame.
Rating:
Summary: Fascinating exposé
Review: For those who want to deny the truth in Clark's fascinating exposé, note from the Washington Post today:
"Clarke's complaint resonates with other former administration officials. Rand Beers, who served as counterterrorism chief after Clarke, has voiced the same complaint .... Flynt Leverett, a former CIA analyst and Middle East specialist who left Bush's National Security Council staff a year ago, also agrees. 'Clarke's critique of administration decision-making and how it did not balance the imperative of finishing the job against al Qaeda versus what they wanted to do in Iraq is absolutely on the money,' Leverett said."
Rating:
Summary: Who's the real enemy here?
Review: Richard Clarke reminds me a lot of Sen. John Kerry in that he flip flops from one opinion to another and tries to lie his way out. Clarke has the right of freedom of speech but to exploit the lost lives that came out of 911 is inexcusable. Perhaps Clarke should write a book called Against All Lies and expose himself for what he really is: a liar trying to profit from a national tradgedy.
Rating:
Summary: Bush Bad...Kerry Good
Review: The bluebird sat in the tree singing harmoniously. The cat sat in the hat along the green stairs. The red fox sat in the box eating his dinner.
| 
