[iwar] [fc:Experts.say.intelligence.comes.in.small.pieces]

From: Fred Cohen (fc@all.net)
Date: 2002-05-19 15:04:25
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] Sex industry hit by cyber turf war (fwd)"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:A.Surge.in.Al.Qaeda.Messages]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Message-Id: <200205192204.g4JM4PC10172@red.all.net>
To: iwar@onelist.com (Information Warfare Mailing List)
Organization: I'm not allowed to say
From: Fred Cohen <fc@all.net>
Mailing-List: list iwar@yahoogroups.com; contact iwar-owner@yahoogroups.com
Precedence: bulk
Date: Sun, 19 May 2002 15:04:25 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: [iwar] [fc:Experts.say.intelligence.comes.in.small.pieces]
Reply-To: iwar@yahoogroups.com
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Experts say intelligence comes in small pieces
 AP Online 
By NANCY BENAC, Associated Press 

WASHINGTON (May 18, 2002 8:31 p.m. EDT) - It comes in fragments of 
conversations, snippets of technical data, whispers from foreign agents, and 
boasts of audacious schemes. Most of it means nothing. Some of it means 
everything.In the summer of 2001, the river of information flowing into 
Washington about possible security threats was cresting."There was a lot of 
chatter in the system," in the words of national security adviser Condoleezza 
Rice.But what to make of it all? One of the principal challenges for the 
government's intelligence analysts is to cull tiny bits of wheat from all the 
chaff.Tens of thousands of tips about threats against American targets come 
in every year. 

The vast majority, says Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld, "tend to be 
eventually discounted as not being valid, or, at the minimum, not being 
actionable."U.S. officials are this spring once again evaluating a growing 
body of intelligence suggesting another large scale al-Qaida attack may be in 
the planning for Europe, the Middle East or the United States, government 
officials said Saturday.One official, speaking on condition of anonymity, 
said the "chatter among al-Qaida types has been increasing in volume" over 
the last several weeks, suggesting the terrorist network is reconstitutiting 
itself after a winter of disruptions caused by the U.S. military operations 
in Afghanistan and widespread arrests across the globe.Some of the 
intelligence suggests al Qaida may be agitating for a large-scale terrorist 
operation but there is no credible evidence as to the method, date or 
location, and some potential threats have been discounted as not credible, 
the officials said.FBI field offices also have been alerted in recent weeks 
to be aware of possible activity ranging from attacks on Fourth of July 
events that draw large crowds to assaults on urban sites such as office 
buildings and apartments. 

Concern also has been passed on about attacks on supermarkets or shopping 
centers - but, again, with no specifics and no way to determine the 
likelihood of such attacks.Often, intelligence experts say, there is no 
specific warning of the most deadly attacks.There is great debate in 
Washington about whether the Bush administration should have known and done 
more in advance of the Sept. 11 attacks. But all sides agree that the 
government needs to improve its ability to sort through the mountain of raw 
intelligence it receives and pull together what is most important - a concept 
known as fusion.The intelligence authorization bill passed by Congress in 
December calls for building up the government's ability to analyze 
intelligence, increasing the portion of the data that actually gets analyzed 
and turning it into more useful information."You just get a river of this 
stuff every day," said former CIA Director Robert Gates."Most of it is 
uncorroborated," he added. "Most of it is from a single source, and it's very 
difficult sometimes to assess both the reliability of the information and its 
provenance - what kind of authoritativeness there is to it."L. Paul Bremer, 
ambassador-at-large for counterterrorism during the Reagan administration, 
recalls coming in to work every morning to a stack of intelligence reports 
that might be 8 inches tall."And by the end of the day," he adds, "I would've 
gone through at least that much again."

The types of reports that might come in: Someone in a bar is overheard saying 
they are going to attack Americans; another country's intelligence agent gets 
wind of a plot to assassinate the American ambassador; a U.S. businessman 
sees someone who looks suspicious taking pictures of his company's office in 
Frankfurt, Germany."You've got to figure out what to make of it all," says 
Bremer. "It's damn hard."Sometimes, simply a big increase in the sheer volume 
of intelligence chatter is a clue that something big is afoot and that extra 
precautions are warranted. That still does not provide the kind of specific 
information often needed to avert an attack.In the months before the 1983 
terrorist bombing of the Marine barracks in Beirut, Lebanon, the United 
States had multiple warnings about a possible attack, says Gates, CIA 
director from 1991 to 1993."Everybody knew something was coming, but you 
didn't know when and you didn't know how," Gates said. "

There's a certain parallel to what happened on September 11. Even as 
disciplined a group as the Marines could only stay on the highest alert for 
so long." The bombing killed 241 Marine, Navy and Army personnel.President 
Bush was advised in the summer of 2001 that al-Qaida terrorists wanted to 
hijack planes, and there were FBI reports raising concerns about Arab men 
taking flight training around the country, but the administration says there 
was no way to act to prevent the Sept. 11 attacks.The two key questions about 
any intelligence report are its credibility and specificity.In assessing 
credibility, intelligence analysts must consider whether the source really 
had access to the type of information being provided, what the source's 
motives are, whether the source has been truthful in the past, and whether 
the information can be corroborated.

Even if the information is deemed credible, though, there may not be much the 
government can do if it is vague.For example, perhaps a U.S. agent who has 
infiltrated a terrorist group reports that the chief said "the attack is on," 
says Bremer."That doesn't help you very much if you don't know where, when 
and against whom."Sometimes, intelligence clues are recognized for their full 
significance only once it is too late.Within hours of the Sept. 11 attacks, 
the CIA and FBI was focusing new attention on Zacarias Moussaoui, who had 
been arrested in August while training at a Minnesota flight school and has 
now been charged as a conspirator in the suicide hijackings. 

------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
Take the Yahoo! Groups survey for a chance to win $1,000.
Your opinion is very important to us!
http://us.click.yahoo.com/NOFBfD/uAJEAA/Ey.GAA/kgFolB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

------------------
http://all.net/ 

Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Next message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] Sex industry hit by cyber turf war (fwd)"
Previous message: Fred Cohen: "[iwar] [fc:A.Surge.in.Al.Qaeda.Messages]"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : 2003-08-24 02:46:32 PDT