You know, I'm just assuming that you, like me, have read all the critiques of Richard Clarke's accusations against the Bush administration; the inconsistencies, political timing, book promotion, etc.
But it occurs to me that everybody may not be as
obsessed diligent as I am in following up on these stories on the Internet. If all you're getting is what's on TV and in the NYT, you may be missing some things that are important.,
Here is a recent Instapundit post on this topic.
I'll add some more as I find ones I like.
Update 2: Fox News's website has a transcript of Clarke from 2002 that just about abolishes the idea that the Bush team "did nothing" to stop al Quaeda. Clarke's words in August of that year directly contradict what he says in his book. Why the discrepancy?
ANGLE: So, just to finish up if we could then, so what you're saying is that there was no — one, there was no [Clinton] plan; two, there was no delay [by the Bush Administration]; and that actually the first changes since October of '98 were made in the spring months just after the administration came into office?If you read nothing else, read this.
CLARKE: You got it. That's right.
Another Update: JustOneMinute has a nice collection of Clarke links. Via Instapundit.