It is on several fronts. First, whenever there have been legitimate terrorist threats to the USA, different members of the intelligence community have come together to solve the problem and reach out to individuals who can help. Next, the concept of an individual (e.g. a special ops person, data specialist, etc.) being both an asset and a liability at the same time is hardly novel. Often times it’s that shade of grey about people that keeps people intrigued. And finally, when someone’s child is at risk, you can’t predict how he or she will react. What Siebert does is – I imagine – what many fathers in his place would say they’d do if they were him, but it also lends itself to some debate. Was he justified? Does he have the right? These are difficult questions to answer when you’re not in that spot, but part of the goal of the book is to make people wonder what would I do?
