Customer Reviews

The Spy Next Door: The Extraordinary Secret Life of Robert Philip Hanssen, the Most Damaging FBI Agent in U.S. History

5 star:		(11)
4 star:		(7)
3 star:		(8)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(1)

 

 

I just finished the two Hanssen books, this one and The Bureau and the Mole, and there is no comparison. I heard a lot from Vise on the radio, but his book is essentially a quickie padded with psychobabble guessing about Hanssen's thoughts and motives. Vise has a few sexy stories and fills around them with chapters of inexplicable praise for Louis Freeh, who must have helped Vise a lot to get such favorable treatment himself when he was being drummed out of the FBI. The Spy Next Door, on the other hand, is carefully researched and beautifully written. The authors work hard trying to explain why anyone with Hanssen's all-American background would commit such heinous crimes, but in the end, they refuse to speculate, laying out what they learned (a lot) and stopping before they go too far. It's a sad tale, but an important one. An easy read, too. Highly recommended.

Shannon and Blackman have written an interesting book about the career of Robert Philip Hanssen, the FBI "mole" who was arrested in February 2001 for spying for the KGB and its successors.

The authors' prose is clear and crisp, and in the end they settle for a "just the facts, ma'am" approach to the story. The book discusses Hanssen's childhood, education, career with the FBI, religious convictions, sexual fantasies, as well as the secrets he betrayed. Hanssen emerges as a study in contradictions: a vocal anti-Communist who spies for the Soviet Union; a devout Catholic who sells vital secrets to an atheist government; an apparent prude who patronizes a stripper and posts odd fantasies about his sex life on the Internet.

Hanssen betrayed everything that he claimed was important to him--his wife, his family, his friends, his religion, and his country. But the motive for his horrendous crimes, which he committed over the course of more than twenty years, is anything but clear. I would have loved it if this book had had more to say about the psychology of a spy, but it didn't. How can someone like Hanssen wake up and go to work every morning, knowing what he's risking and what he's done? Why doesn't the contradiction between his public image and his life cause him to break down? Is he able to compartmentalize things, so that the "good" Hanssen can live his life while the "bad" Hanssen" lives a lie? Is he just a sociopath, who doesn't really care about anyone or anything but himself? Maybe the FBI's own behavioral science unit will weigh in on this subject one day, but Shannon and Blackman don't venture down this dangerous trail. For better or worse, they describe "what" Hanssen is without really explaining "why" he is.

Another gap in the book is that, apart from a few generalizations, it doesn't address why the FBI and CIA seem so incompetent when it comes to catching spies (not that the KGB comes off looking a whole lot better). Perhaps the problem is that resources aren't allocated well, or that FBI and CIA personnel aren't trained to recognize the behavioral patterns of a spy--whatever the reason, the book largely leaves that problem to the reader's imagination.

The thing that should really strike you about this book is the realization that, for the last 25 years, there has always been at least one--usually several--moles who are busily selling vital American secrets. And those are just the ones that we know about. There is no obvious reason to think that there aren't just as many spies today as there have been in the last two decades. A book like this cries out for an explanation: what, if anything, are the FBI and the CIA doing to make sure that a disaster like Hanssen doesn't happen again?

I've been fascinated by the Hanssen spy case since it came to light early last year. Yet it amazes me that three books about Hanssen have already surfaced: this one, Vise's "The Bureau and the Mole," and Havill's "The Spy Who Stayed Out in the Cold." To be blunt, all three are "quicky paperback books" dressed up as serious hardbacks. Anybody who wants to know the whole truth or anything near it is going to have to wait for years for it to come out.

This fact is painfully evident in Shannon and Blackman's book. There are several flaws to it that are evident with just a quick scan (I'm still reading it):

1. Omission: In Vise's equally poor quality book, he states a very important fact, that Hanssen's brother-in-law, a fellow FBI agent, reported him in 1990 as a person living well beyond his means. That is a red-flag indicator that someone in a sensitive job like an FBI counterintelligence specialist (as Hanssen was) may have gone wrong. Incredibly, according to Vise, the FBI did nothing with this tip. Yet a search of the text and index of Shannon and Blackman's book makes no mention of this incident or even the name of the FBI agent who reported him (maybe I missed it, or the authors discounted it, but it should have been mentioned!).

2. Sourcing: Just like Vise, the authors don't deign to detail the "extensive research" that they conducted in the few short months since Hanssen's arrest. Instead, they expect us to take it for granted that their research was great without giving us the bibliography and endnotes that let us test that assumption. I'll give an example. On page 80, Shannon and Blackman state the following about Hanssen's personality:

"He didn't know what [his fellow FBI agents] spoke about when out at the bars and strip clubs, but maybe it was about him --maybe that was all they ever talked about. Hanssen had spent his life pressing his face up against the glass . . . more than anything he wanted power --real power, which to [Hanssen] meant the power to humiliate others."

Now, how do Shannon and Blackman know this? They didn't interview Hanssen (he hasn't even been sentenced yet!!). Are they mind-readers? Somehow, I suspect that this passage is the opinion of a psychiatrist (one of those that they interviewed). What's the harm in saying that in a footnote??

This is surprising to me because Shannon is capable of superb research (I don't know anything about Blackman). I have read her book about the 1985 murder of a DEA agent in Mexico. She took well over two years to write it and included 15 pages of endnotes. Yet the diligence shown in that book is absent in "The Spy Next Door."

3. Style of Research: In their very brief description of sources, the authors state that they made "dozens of written requests" for help from Hanssen's wife, his family, and Mrs. Hanssen's attorney. I'm sorry, but I think that "dozens of written requests" constitute pestering people and is not worthy of journalists of Shannon and Blackman's apparent caliber. After the first few rejections, this duo should have taken the hint and moved on.

I close this review out with the fervent hope that Peter Earley is working on a book about this case. He did the definitive one on Aldrich Ames (arrested in 1994 but the book only came out in 1997). Earley got Ames' cooperation, those of his colleagues, and incredibly some of his Russian handlers. Furthermore, he gives a precise account of his sources by chapter and a bibliography (both of which are sadly lacking in "The Spy Next Door").

To sum up, I'm sorry I bought this book but glad that I at least got it at a steep discount. I wouldn't recommend that anyone shell out the bucks to buy a brand new hardback copy. They should wait a year or two and get the paperback on the remainder shelves.

This is the best of the three Hanssen books published so far, having read all three.
This is the most deeply-researched, and the one that deals most extensively with the Hanssen case. David Vise's book, for instance, diverges repeatedly when it gimickally tries to juxtapose Hanssen's spying with Louis Freeh's career.

I loved every word. The Spy Next Door reads like the great spy book it is. Bob Hanssen is dissected with a scalpel by two skilled and meticulous writers who probe the traitor's life from childhood through his suspenseful and long-overdue capture by fellow FBI agents. After reading the book, I think I finally understand Hanssen well enough to know why he betrayed his country, but like any good mystery, there is no single, simple explanation. Shannon and Blackman explore every avenue and come up with some fascinating clues.

This book was a good read. It seemed to be more thoroughly researched(although there are still open questions) and was not simply rushed out by two greedy authors capitalizing on recent events.

I understand that Bob and Bonnie Hansen's position was not represented in this book. I would've liked more concrete evidence rather than author speculation, but that is implausible in this case.

With the amount of research and time that was invested in this book, I am reasonably satisfied with the result and give this book 4 stars

I enjoyed this fast paced view into the life of a turncoat. Some interesting introductions to Opus Dei too. However, I found one glaring inconsistency that makes me wonder if something is left unsaid...

The fouth page into Chapter 17 (page 199 in my hardcover edition) the authors detail an investigation into a suspected spy at the FBI. Interviewing his children they "...seconded their father's assertion that his computer skills weren't remotely sufficient to have enabled him to encrypt messages to the KGB on diskettes."

In my reading of the book this occurs before October 1999. This is a full year earlier than the November 2000 acquisition of the KGB files that contained the encrypted diskettes. At the time of the interview the intelligence services did not have the details of Hanssen's betrayal. They supposedly knew nothing about the diskettes.

Did I miss something in the story? Or did the intelligence services know more about the betrayal before October 1999 than the book tells us?

Anyone else find this curious?

Here we go...another attempt to get a book out in time to sell it before the general public forgets who the subject is. Problem is with that theory is that we have seveal books that are way too much a like. If only one would have covered his chilhood better and paid epecial attention to Opus Dei, both of which I believe had more effect than anyone will ever know. I'd also like to know how an FBI Agent got his hands on all this supposed NSA and CIA information. Even in these days of "Homeland Security", these folks just don't share well at all. I think there is/was a middle-man (CIA?) in there somewhere. No way NSA or CIA would reveal info to the FBI, who they consider just to be the Federal police dept with no "need to know" anything important of an international nature. The whole thing sounds bogus to me. - Former NSA Employee

The book reads like a spy novel and keeps the reader's interest all the way til the end. It was extremely informative as well as entertaining and very depressing to learn about the inadequacies of the FBI and our intelligence services. A terrific read!

"The Spy Next Door" is an astonishing easy reading story about a common man with an uncommon ability to elude. Robert Hanssen's 25 year job at the FBI gave him access to carefully guarded national security secrets. Ann Blackman and Elaine Shannon are investigative reporters that give a biography of a man whose life is unbelievable, yet true and amazing.

The "Spy Next Door" page turner includes his life from ostracized child to super spy for the Soviets. The only son of a Chicago Cop, he never received his father's approval, was a high school misfit, who developed deep resentments. On the surface, Bob never made a big deal about anything, but he didn't like surprises and he didn't like being forgotten. He was smart and knew by developing a facade of normalcy - he played the boring man next door. Beneath his shell of normalcy he built his dual lives - "lawful" FBI agent and Soviet Spy; "faithful" husband and playboy; and "loyal Catholic" and aesthetic. He kept an arms length from reality so he could chase an exciting game of cat and mouse. He dropped clues - almost daring people to catch him or pay better attention.

What amazed me is that he could have gotten away with it. Why did he take the risk of reactivating? There was little chance of the FBI catching him as long as he stayed dormant. Hanssen's espionage has little to do with spying and much to do with emotional wants. He is an arrogant man harboring resentments and needed "respect" and friendships from an enemy that laughed at his naive requests for little money and yet giving them key intelligence - causing deaths of our agents - so they would pay attention and he could get retribution - telling everyone "I will show you!"

By blending in, being "common" - no one paid attention to him. The betrayal to this country is enormous.