

Search for Flight 370 Enters Daunting New Phase - wyclif
http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304914904579441812954932236

======
__pThrow
After 9/11 we learned of "chatter".

I have wondered what the NSA etc. can say about chatter in recent weeks. What
the NSA might know.

And if the NSA doesn't know, what that says about NSA efficacy.

~~~
Nanzikambe
They knew next to nothing pre 9/11 (1), odds are they know next to nothing
now.

Why?

Bureaucracies are not agile enough to effect real-time and reactive signals
intelligence gathering. They breed internal cultures and petty fiefdoms which
by their very nature are loath to cooperate. For the relative cost of
intelligence agencies, their victories are few and far between and often only
accomplished in tandem with established means of spy craft. Advocates will of
course claim this is due to the secretive nature of the work, however
declassified documents of times gone by rarely prove that the case.

Any villain that hasn't been living under a rock is aware of the technological
capabilities of these agencies, rendering them virtually ineffective. The NSA
didn't catch Osama, old fashioned spy craft, detective work and torture did
(2).

[1] [http://consortiumnews.com/2014/01/07/nsa-insiders-reveal-
wha...](http://consortiumnews.com/2014/01/07/nsa-insiders-reveal-what-went-
wrong/)

[2] [http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bin-ladens-death-
and-...](http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/bin-ladens-death-and-the-
debate-over-torture/2011/05/11/AFd1mdsG_story.html)

~~~
pedalpete
"They knew next to nothing pre 9/11 (1), odds are they know next to nothing
now."

But I suspect what __Pthrow was suggesting was that the agencies could look
back at the chatter they gathered, and put the pieces together from what they
heard. Though, in order to do this, they'd still need to have some idea of
what they are looking for.

