I started reading this book after I first read the author’s book on the Secret Service which made a passing comment on how the FBI holds itself to a higher standard than the Secret Service in terms of leadership structure and accountability. The book is written in a journalistic style and filled with interesting information about the FBI and fascinating stories, some of which has been told publicly for the first time in this book. Prior to the book I have never heard of the FBI’s TacOps, which is the group that does a lot of secretive break-ins and planting of bugs. I was surprised with how much the book revealed in terms of the methodology of TacOps from staying on elevators for hours, customize sleeping pills for pets and taking photos of everything so that they would be able to put everything back in place. The book shares stories of close-calls and quicking thinking on the feet by agents. Beginning with the book’s first chapter on TacOps I was hooked!The book was more than a collection of stories and gossip of the FBI—I really appreciated the serious discussion about the FBI’s leadership. The author discusses how different the old FBI was under J. Edgar Hoover and today’s FBI. The author pulls no punch in describing the bad leadership that the FBI had in their history; in particular, the book zooms in on William Sessions and Louis Freeh. Sessions was a former judge whom many felt was arrogant and incompetent. He was the director of the FBI during Ruby Ridge and was strongly disliked by agents below him and the Attorney Generals above him. He was also accused of abusing his privilege as Director, taking FBI plane rides to visit family and friends, allowing his wife to access floors in FBI headquarters that was suppose to be for agents with clearance, etc. Sessions never learned his job and was eventually dismissed by Bill Clinton. The book revealed that Sessions was in denial that he was fired and even delayed leaving his office. The other incompetent director that the book focuses on was Freeh, whom the author described more as self-serving for his reputation at the risk of the FBI’s own reputation. Freeh was against modernizing the FBI technologically during his stint which hampered the agency when the FBI’s own computer system was out of date and so slow that agents used their own personal computers and even developed their own system instead. This was later identified as being a problem that contributed to the inability of the US to process intelligence efficiently prior to 9/11. The author wasn’t just out to slam bad leadership; he also focused on the good leadership of FBI director Robert Mueller. Like Sessions, Mueller’s background wasn’t as an agent but in law; however, this is where the similarities end for Mueller was willing to learn about the agency while Sessions wasn’t and simply thought he knew it all. Mueller was also a no nonsense leader, being a decorated former Marine officer who knows how to lead from the front and set the example. Mueller helped modernized the FBI technologically and was able to know how to manage people. Under his leadership the FBI’s morale improved and had a better sense of direction.The most fascinating part of the book for me was the discussion of how the FBI changed in the Post 9/11 world. Counter-terrorism has become a big part of the FBI and now there is an exponential growth of joint-counter terrorism centers working in coordination with other Federal and local agencies all across. In today’s FBI the goalpost have shifted from investigating a terrorist activity to preventing a terrorist activity from happening in the first place. Prior to 9/11 the FBI would have been happy with the objective of capturing and preventing a terrorist from carrying out his mission but today the goal is not just to go after one terrorist but to know everything else about that terrorist’s network. This means that the FBI isn’t just only about going after one terrorist and arresting them but to the point that it is safe it means that the FBI will not move right away to arrest a suspect but will continue to monitor him to find others and any other support structures for the terrorist. I also appreciated the fact that the author was not blind towards the concern for civil liberties and in the discussion of the FBI’s future the author attacked the idea that some push for the FBI to be less about law enforcement and more about intelligence along the lines of the British MI5. The problem the author pointed out is that the lack of law enforcement capability will hinder counter-terrorism in a day and age that recognize the problem of multi-agencies being unable to coordinate a meaningful response. The British MI5 is severely hindered because they are now a law enforcement agency who can make arrests, etc. Furthermore, critics of this model also note that with a law enforcement background those agents involved with counter-terrorism would easily abuse civil liberties, something that is still important for those whose mentality is driven by law enforcement and investigations rather than mere paramilitary or intelligence background.I think people will enjoy this book. I do recommend it! The author states that the events of 9/11 caused the FBI to shift its priority to preventing attacks. The FBI now works closely with the CIA. The author quotes a high-ranking FBI official as saying there is going to be "an attack using chemical, biological, or radiological material." Another high-ranking official agrees that the greatest threat is "an attack with weapons of mass destruction(WMD)." Another scary threat, according to an FBI higher-up, is "the explosion by an enemy of a nuclear weapon high in the atmosphere to unleash an electromagnetic pulse (EMP)." The EMP generated by the blast "would fry all electronics in North America." America would be "back to the 1300s." Another scary quote by a named source is that foreign governments make more than 10,000 attempts each day "to penetrate U.S. military and commercial computer networks." To prevent cyberintrusion, this official advises companies to remove from the Internet "anything they really care about." So why would somebody read this sounds-like-horror-genre? You would read the book to get an insider's view of how the FBI has worked, historically, and how it works today. You can get answers to questions that you might not find in another book. Questions: What does the FBI Laboratory Division do? (conducts "more than a million forensic examinations a year") Where can you go to find out how to crack a code from long ago? (Google "cipher hard to break.") Other questions: How do agents check for explosives? How do they stage a lock-in? How do FBI agents slow down a target who is approaching his agent-occupied home or office? (sudden traffic jam; fire hydrant flooding the street; air let out of tires) And how do they make a room look like it hasn't been covertly entered? (rake the marks their shoes have made on carpets; throw dust on various items) The reader might draw the conclusion that the book's title is a misnomer. The book might more accurately be titled THE FORMER SECRETS OF THE FBI. The book is interesting. I received a free copy as part of the goodreads FIRST READS program. Thank you, Ronald Kessler. Thank you, Crown/Random House.
Do You like book Os Segredos Do FBI (2013)?
I was not a fan of this book for three main reasons. The first was that the majority of the material in this book had been published in the author's previous works on the FBI. Secondly, the new material, several interviews with recently-retired FBI officials, makes up around 40% (at best) of the book and is poorly integrated with the rest of the text. As a result, there is little internal coherence within the chapters of the book and, other than than the general topic, there is no central theme to the book. If you want to read some gossip about Hoover and some fawning, breathless, hagiographic interview of former FBI officials, this is your book.
—thekenziesmith
Reads more like a brief history. The "secrets" alluded to in the title are summed up in point form on the back cover. Kessler fails to remain objective in his writing and comes across as an apologist for the FBI. Failures by the bureau, (and there have been many) are summarily discarded or excused away while the successes are celebrated. If you are looking for brief history or review of methods and where the FBI is headed in the future you will enjoy this.
—Queen
Really enjoyed this book. Lots of little known facts about our country leaders, past and present.
—Jane
