Slashdot Mirror
Book Review: Permanent Emergency
OverTheGeicoE writes "Former TSA Administrator Kip Hawley has been in the news in recent months, talking about how the Transportation Security Administration is broken and how it can be fixed. Some of his TSA criticisms in the popular press seem to make sense. This seemed strange to me. Just last March he was defending TSA in a debate with Bruce Schneier in The Economist. Then, the very next month, he's criticizing his former agency as if he was on the other side of that debate to begin with. Why? I felt like I was missing something, so I decided to read his book to find out more about his position. The title of the book is Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security, and it is co-written by Nathan Means." Keep reading for the rest of OverTheGeicoE's review.
Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security
author
Kip Hawley and Nathan Means
pages
260
publisher
Palgrave Macmillan
rating
6
reviewer
OverTheGeicoE
ISBN
978-0-230-12095-2
summary
An inside look at TSA from its former leader.
The book is partly a memoir of Hawley's involvement with TSA, which predates his appointment as its administrator. Hawley helped architect the TSA shortly after it was first authorized. He left government service once that was finished, but came back again in 2005, appointed by President George W. Bush to become TSA's third administrator in four years. He stuck with the job until the exact moment Barack Obama was sworn in as President in January of 2009. If you're looking for insight into TSA's most controversial policies, the extensive use of body scanning and pat down searches, you won't find that in this book. Those policies were put in place by Hawley's successor almost two years later. The phrase 'body scan' is used exactly once.
The book breaks from the memoir style at times and changes to that of an action-suspense thriller. It is interwoven with segments of prose similar to a Tom Clancy novel. In these segments we learn about the life, and possibly the ultimate death, of an Al Qaeda operative who goes by multiple names throughout the course of the book. Raised in Austria, we follow the terrorist through training with Al Qaeda in Pakistan and his connection with various airline-related terrorist plots against the United States. Under Administrator Hawley, TSA uses all its intelligence resources to track his moves and act to thwart the terrorist's nefarious schemes.
The Clancyesque sections are a severe weakness of the book, bordering on laughable at times. For example, there's a description of a Casio watch that reminded me of a Dave Barry parody of Tom Clancy. The action-suspense writing style also tends to over-dramatize and exaggerate TSA's actual accomplishments. The intelligence sources TSA uses all belong to conventional intelligence agencies, both US and foreign. The event leading to the most dramatic moments of the book, the disruption of a liquid bomb plot, was the work of British intelligence and law enforcement in the UK. The authors describe in great, suspenseful detail that while the British are rounding up actual Al Qaeda cell members, TSA in the US is waging war against an entire phase of matter, one that covers about 70% of Earth's surface. Thanks to their determined efforts, TSA was able to ban liquids from carry on luggage literally overnight. However, in this and all other terrorist plots covered in this book, the authors never offer any evidence that TSA's use of its borrowed intelligence ever allowed TSA to disrupt any specific, credible, and imminent threat. So, if you like the idea of a Tom Clancy book where the Jack Ryan character agonizes over intel a lot but never actually does anything of provable value with it, this may be the book for you.
Although the writing style was problematic at times, it didn't totally undermine the value of the book. It helped me understand why mainstream media is so accepting of TSA. During Hawley's tenure, TSA made strong, successful efforts to woo the press, including interviews with CBS' 60 Minutes and appearances on Oprah. The good relationship established during Hawley's administration apparently continues to this day, despite the dramatic changes in operations imposed by his successor. The book also gives an amusing mini-bio of TSA's 'Blogger Bob' Burns, who has been called 'the Tokyo Rose of the modern age' for his defenses of TSA under John Pistole.
I've often wondered why TSA seems so unresponsive to the American public, and this book offered me a plausible explanation. Hawley seems to view TSA almost exclusively as a weapon in the US war against Al Qaeda. When TSA implements policies that seem crazy or ineffective to the rest of us, it doesn't use outside opinions to judge the effectiveness of its policies. Instead it uses information gathered from the intelligence community unavailable to outsiders. A policy change is considered effective if Al Qaeda reacts in a desirable way. For example, if a TSA operation deploys VIPR teams at public transportation centers and suspected Al Qaeda operatives leave the US afterwards, the operation is considered successful.
This book also helped me better understand Hawley's recent press comments. It sounds as if Hawley is saying that TSA's most controversial policies can be terminated if intelligence shows Al Qaeda to be on the decline. Now that he is outside TSA, Hawley seems to see what the American public does, and sees a reason to change security. If intelligence shows an increase of Al Qaeda activity, security can be raised again as needed.
This understanding of how TSA works is also confusing. What we're actually seeing from TSA is an expansion of their activities in recent years, with no meaningful or significant easing of its invasive passenger screening being proposed. Could that mean Al Qaeda is actually on the rise in some way not obvious to the general public? If not, Hawley's successor is a real bungler, and I would expect Hawley to call him that when given a chance. Instead, Hawley specifically refuses to second guess his successor at the end of his book, leaving me puzzled about how the US war against Al Qaeda is actually going.
Permanent Emergency is an interesting book. It certainly has flaws. The writing style is inconsistent and often unsatisfying. It is not entirely factually correct in many of its stories; TSA classifies a lot of information, and the authors admit to changing or concealing details for that and other reasons. The book does not attempt to tackle the most controversial aspects of today's TSA policies. Still, the book gives insight into how TSA was formed, what problems it was designed to address, and how it operates. TSA is so new, there are few sources of this type to examine right now, so any firsthand account is useful. I recommend this book to anyone concerned by TSA's operations, as it helps us understand how TSA became what it is now.
You can purchase Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
The book breaks from the memoir style at times and changes to that of an action-suspense thriller. It is interwoven with segments of prose similar to a Tom Clancy novel. In these segments we learn about the life, and possibly the ultimate death, of an Al Qaeda operative who goes by multiple names throughout the course of the book. Raised in Austria, we follow the terrorist through training with Al Qaeda in Pakistan and his connection with various airline-related terrorist plots against the United States. Under Administrator Hawley, TSA uses all its intelligence resources to track his moves and act to thwart the terrorist's nefarious schemes.
The Clancyesque sections are a severe weakness of the book, bordering on laughable at times. For example, there's a description of a Casio watch that reminded me of a Dave Barry parody of Tom Clancy. The action-suspense writing style also tends to over-dramatize and exaggerate TSA's actual accomplishments. The intelligence sources TSA uses all belong to conventional intelligence agencies, both US and foreign. The event leading to the most dramatic moments of the book, the disruption of a liquid bomb plot, was the work of British intelligence and law enforcement in the UK. The authors describe in great, suspenseful detail that while the British are rounding up actual Al Qaeda cell members, TSA in the US is waging war against an entire phase of matter, one that covers about 70% of Earth's surface. Thanks to their determined efforts, TSA was able to ban liquids from carry on luggage literally overnight. However, in this and all other terrorist plots covered in this book, the authors never offer any evidence that TSA's use of its borrowed intelligence ever allowed TSA to disrupt any specific, credible, and imminent threat. So, if you like the idea of a Tom Clancy book where the Jack Ryan character agonizes over intel a lot but never actually does anything of provable value with it, this may be the book for you.
Although the writing style was problematic at times, it didn't totally undermine the value of the book. It helped me understand why mainstream media is so accepting of TSA. During Hawley's tenure, TSA made strong, successful efforts to woo the press, including interviews with CBS' 60 Minutes and appearances on Oprah. The good relationship established during Hawley's administration apparently continues to this day, despite the dramatic changes in operations imposed by his successor. The book also gives an amusing mini-bio of TSA's 'Blogger Bob' Burns, who has been called 'the Tokyo Rose of the modern age' for his defenses of TSA under John Pistole.
I've often wondered why TSA seems so unresponsive to the American public, and this book offered me a plausible explanation. Hawley seems to view TSA almost exclusively as a weapon in the US war against Al Qaeda. When TSA implements policies that seem crazy or ineffective to the rest of us, it doesn't use outside opinions to judge the effectiveness of its policies. Instead it uses information gathered from the intelligence community unavailable to outsiders. A policy change is considered effective if Al Qaeda reacts in a desirable way. For example, if a TSA operation deploys VIPR teams at public transportation centers and suspected Al Qaeda operatives leave the US afterwards, the operation is considered successful.
This book also helped me better understand Hawley's recent press comments. It sounds as if Hawley is saying that TSA's most controversial policies can be terminated if intelligence shows Al Qaeda to be on the decline. Now that he is outside TSA, Hawley seems to see what the American public does, and sees a reason to change security. If intelligence shows an increase of Al Qaeda activity, security can be raised again as needed.
This understanding of how TSA works is also confusing. What we're actually seeing from TSA is an expansion of their activities in recent years, with no meaningful or significant easing of its invasive passenger screening being proposed. Could that mean Al Qaeda is actually on the rise in some way not obvious to the general public? If not, Hawley's successor is a real bungler, and I would expect Hawley to call him that when given a chance. Instead, Hawley specifically refuses to second guess his successor at the end of his book, leaving me puzzled about how the US war against Al Qaeda is actually going.
Permanent Emergency is an interesting book. It certainly has flaws. The writing style is inconsistent and often unsatisfying. It is not entirely factually correct in many of its stories; TSA classifies a lot of information, and the authors admit to changing or concealing details for that and other reasons. The book does not attempt to tackle the most controversial aspects of today's TSA policies. Still, the book gives insight into how TSA was formed, what problems it was designed to address, and how it operates. TSA is so new, there are few sources of this type to examine right now, so any firsthand account is useful. I recommend this book to anyone concerned by TSA's operations, as it helps us understand how TSA became what it is now.
You can purchase Permanent Emergency: Inside the TSA and the Fight for the Future of American Security from amazon.com. Slashdot welcomes readers' book reviews -- to see your own review here, read the book review guidelines, then visit the submission page.
He was once my boss and I thought he was a pretty level-headed guy with a pretty good vision. Perhaps it's this politics and government stuff which makes him look like a fish out of water.
A feeling of having made the same mistake before: Deja Foobar
The next threat after terrorists.
They are making air travel so inconvenient and humiliating so we'll all start taking the train. Oh yes, thanks to the machinations of the TSA and train lobby, soon we'll all be coasting along at 50 miles and hour. Crossing the country may take several days, but the scanners and body cavity searches will be history!
So there are people we SUSPECT are Al Qaeda ... but we're not going to arrest them when they try to leave the country.
I mean, what possible information could they have that would be useful?
None of this makes any sense.
The phrase "Permanent Emergency" made me think of "war is peace".
When you are sure of something, you probably are wrong (search for "Unskilled and Unaware of It").
From reading Bruce's and Kip's arguments over time, and their debate, I feel that Kip has actually learned from Bruce, and that's why he's taken up his arguments.
From TFR(eview):
Which is pretty much about as surprising as the Sun coming up in the east to anyone with any knowledge of security. That's not how security measures work, or how they're meant to work, or anything but an assumption created of whole cloth by armchair experts.
I didn't double check the locks on my doors when I left this morning because I knew a specific burglar was coming to my door today - but because further up my semi rural road, their has been a string of break in's and closer down to me a car has been spotted prowling. Nor am I under any illusion that locks will stop someone determined - but they will deter the less determined. Simple, basic, bog standard security theory and practice.
This seemed strange to me.
Well, you see, adults can have complicated and nuanced points of view that don't just see everything in pure black and white.
But this is about when they leave the country.
Even if everything else is correct (and I find it difficult to believe that Al Qaeda has that many operatives who could fit into US society) what difference does it make when they are leaving the country?
Why not arrest them on the way out?
A number of Australian articles about the farce of the TSA search and detection methods have been posted by scientific friends of mine in Australia, which point out what I and other people with counter-terrorism experience have long known - more than 80 percent of all the methods and techniques the TSA use are proven to not work.
Given that, and other objective evidence, reading a book on this subject would be best classified under Absurdist Comedy, or Satire.
Not Science.
-- Tigger warning: This post may contain tiggers! --
I'm pretty sure that's the only way to fix the TSA.
Given that they haven't switched their tactics yet I don't think that is the reason.
Getting a bomb onto a plane is a bit difficult.
It is much easier to get a few guns and go shoot up a mall or school or whatever.
Just read This story from Fark. FFS America....
"I bless every day that I continue to live, for every day is pure profit."
You have spotted TSA posing as Santa Claus, and he pats down the kids. Right?
am I for the TSA or against the TSA? BUY MY BOOK to find out!
"When TSA implements policies that seem crazy or ineffective to the rest of us, it doesn't use outside opinions to judge the effectiveness of its policies. Instead it uses information gathered from the intelligence community unavailable to outsiders. A policy change is considered effective if Al Qaeda reacts in a desirable way. For example, if a TSA operation deploys VIPR teams at public transportation centers and suspected Al Qaeda operatives leave the US afterwards, the operation is considered successful. ... It sounds as if Hawley is saying that TSA's most controversial policies can be terminated if intelligence shows Al Qaeda to be on the decline. Now that he is outside TSA, Hawley seems to see what the American public does, and sees a reason to change security. If intelligence shows an increase of Al Qaeda activity, security can be raised again as needed. ... What we're actually seeing from TSA is an expansion of their activities in recent years, with no meaningful or significant easing of its invasive passenger screening being proposed. Could that mean Al Qaeda is actually on the rise in some way not obvious to the general public?"
Someone who used to work for the TSA writes an allegedly insightful book in favor of the TSA. It's a win-win situation, it makes his former job look important and good, it makes him look good and important, it makes the TSA look good, and it makes him look like an insider with information that no one else knows. This is good for selling books and it's good for everyone and it's not something the government will oppose since it makes them look good. News at 11.
The character of the untrained, uneducated "expert" with zero experience that somehow using inborn instinct is the best man for the job would be the perfect idol for a TSA clown.
I'm not sure what books that was out of but even Fleming's Bond was way more believable because he'd done things to become what he was. I got a very strong anti-intellectual vibe to the point of it even coming off as hating apprenticeships from Clancy.
Compare it with Japan in the 1960s or France in the 1970s when their first high speed trains ran. It was lower density back then but still viable, and the transport corridors have had some influence on density since.
So the TSA is the armed resistance to the population of the USA. It isn't a 'war on terror' its a 'war on residency'.
Sounds rather similar in style to the "Watchtower" magazine dropped off by a pair of kindly, well-dressed men at my door the other day who also seemed manically concerned for my well-being.
After they left, I read the literature they left. It didn't offer anything terribly unexpected, though I can commend them on their use proper grammar and punctuation while expressing faulty logic and begged questions.
Though, after looking into that one fellow's lifeless eyes while discussing spiritual matters, I'm no longer sure if these kinds of people (JWs and TSA folks are the same breed, I'm certain), are actually stupid, or just evidence of lower life forms trying their very best to grasp our confusing world. Do you mock a donkey for lacking the ability to think beyond its limited parameters?
Problem is, unlike the TSA, donkeys don't carry automatic weapons. Which, when you think about it, puts the TSA beneath the JWs!
It would be more like New York to Washington at 300+km/h instead of suburban travel at 50km/h or whatever your train does with all the stops.
If you fit the profile of the terrorist aka young dark skinned muslim you get extra checks.
Otherwise aka 60 year old grandma with a strong southern accent you get to pass with no checks at all.
All the staff and that means all the staff working for the agency that does the checking are highly paid (a bit less than IT) and have to undergo a substantial background check and a polygraph test.
The main part of the screening is an interview with a highly trained interviewer.