Michael McCaul

There are a few reasons I didn’t particularly like Congressman Michael McCaul’s book “Failure of Imagination”. First, if you’re going to list a number of problems, I’d like to also see a list of viable solutions. Without that, you’re just complaining, but not being very helpful. Also, I generally don’t like books which describe creative ways to commit acts of terror, which I look at as a “how to” books for terrorists. And while the Congressman made the point that he wasn’t giving away any secrets, and that unfriendly nations and the major terrorist organizations such as Al Qaeda, ISIS, Al Shabaab, Boko Haram, etc., already have this information, it’s also true that the number of “lone wolf” terror incidents is rising, and many of those disgruntled individuals don’t have the support and direction from those major terror organizations, and may not be very sophisticated in their planning. So a book which describe weaknesses in our defenses, and creative ways to create havoc and destruction, such as this one, just might give them many fresh ideas to consider.

Generally, “Failure of Imagination” looks at a number of real or imagined terror threats against our Country. Some of the threats are written as fictionalized stories of the future describing how an attack against our Country could be made. While the fictionalized stories are interesting in the way a Tom Clancy novel might be, but in this case, there's no super-hero coming to the rescue to thwart the plans.

Other threats which are not fictionalized lay out the problems, but practical solutions are missing. Maybe there just aren’t any good answers as of yet, and maybe that’s the point. But as Chairman of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I would have expected that he would have identified his specific ideas for improvements. Instead, he seems mostly to offer simple generalities. For example, when discussing the threats from ISIS, he notes that the Obama Administration isn't doing enough. He states that we need to hit their finances by stopping their sales of oil, and by preventing them from kidnapping people for ransom. OK, good ideas, and I’ve read that we are hitting their oil refineries and oil infrastructure. But I’m not quite sure how we can tell a criminal organization that it’s not nice to kidnap others and hold them for ransom, or to or to ensure that other criminal enterprises stop buying oil from them at deeply discounted prices. So to simply state the obvious, and to state steps which are already being taken to the extent possible, didn't seem helpful. I'd be curious to see exactly what the Congressman has in mind to stop the sale of oil by ISIS and to make ISIS stop kidnapping individuals for ransom.

He also notes that Obama has basically done nothing to secure our southern (Mexican) border. He writes that we need to do more - things like more fencing and video surveillance. But from information I’ve seen, the size of the undocumented population from across the border has stopped growing for the first time in decades. Perhaps this was due to the economic downturn of 2008, or perhaps it was because since that time, there are 3,000 additional Border Patrol agents along the Southwest Border. Also, our border fencing, unmanned aircraft surveillance systems, and ground surveillance systems have more than doubled since 2008. So if the Congressman feels that the Obama Administration has basically done nothing to secure our southern border, and that the additional boots on the ground, new technology, and the resources provided in the last six years aren’t enough, or aren’t working, what additional steps should be taken? Is he suggesting the Donald Trump wall, which Mexico will pay for (?) is the solution? He doesn’t really say.

In pointing out weakness in so many areas, such as cyber-security, our Visa program, the Department of Homeland Security, etc., as a Congressman and Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, aren't those things he should be working toward improving? Enacting new laws and preparing spending bills are Congressional duties. I think he may be taking steps to work on these self-identified weaknesses, but he didn't provide specific details about his ideas. Perhaps he felt describing House Resolutions he was sponsoring would make the narrative too technical. But to me, simply blaming Obama for everything, and then not offering specific solutions, was a weakness in the book. It made the book more of a partisan rant than a helpful overview of the problem(s) and solution(s), unless his point was the need to elect Republicans to state and federal offices.

Another aspect of the book which seemed more political oriented than practical, besides making me feel I should fear Obama’s weaknesses as much as terrorist’s strengths, was McCaul’s diversion into the 1996 presidential election. From a look at terrorist threats today, and to jump back five election cycles seemed somewhat strange. But his point was that there was a threat of foreign (Chinese) contributions to the Clinton campaign which could possibly have influenced political considerations for the winning candidate. I thought at first this might lead to a complaint against the Citizens United decision of the Supreme Court which has the effect of allowing huge donations from unnamed sources, but that wasn’t the case. Instead, I had the feeling that bringing this item from the past into today’s discussion of terrorism threats was intended to remind us that we shouldn’t trust those Clintons, especially the one running for President in 2016.

So the book left me a little disappointed, more political than practical. Unless perhaps that the true purpose of the Congressman's book is to remind us all of the many and varied threats against our Country, and with that in mind, to encourage us all to be supportive of government steps to protect us. So instead of joining a protest against the government for asking Apple to help analyze the iPhone records of the San Bernadino shooters, or supporting individuals who, under the banner of "freedom on information", divulge secret surveillance techniques the government uses to monitor terrorist activities, we all should consider the greater threat and act accordingly.
… (mere)

I feared Failures of Imagination was going to be partisan, and I was amply rewarded. Right in the introduction, McCaul blames President Obama for security failures. So this is not an impartial examination of anything. The book turns into eight case studies of the near future, in which someone, somewhere falls victim to terrorism. Each one uses a profile of the terrorist and his or her last days, and profiles of American victims, in their last days, interspersed with official reports to the President, and McCaul’s recommendation to prevent more of the same. In every case, it the Obama Administration’s fault for not having bigger, tougher, meaner policies, more oversight, more intrusion, more policing and more foreign involvement. Basically, the USA needs to be under a bombproof dome.

Despite the title, the stories are all easily imaginable. McCaul made them more accessible by basing them on actual events elsewhere. For example: an attack on the world’s largest shopping mall, based on the attack at a Nairobi mall a year ago. Ironically, very little imagination was employed in the eight stories. Every one of them could be the plot of a film or a thriller. And probably is.

I was rather hoping for more imaginative scenarios, as the title led me to believe. Maybe using Google driverless bomb-equipped cars to repeatedly attack the White House until they could break through the fence and blow up the building.

Aside from attacks on Obama, the only other effect was fear. We should all be even more afraid. Of everyone. Every day. Any of these events is possible at any time, thanks to Obama, so we need to be fearful of them.

While I was not impressed by Failures of Imagination, I can understand where many, many Americans would be enlightened (and entertained) by the scenarios, and their view of the world reinforced. So for many, it is a worthwhile read.

David Wineberg… (mere)