Pages

Monday, May 15, 2006

Traffic Analysis

Traffic analysis is not eavesdropping. I was stunned at the hyper-ventilating over the latest disclosure that our NSA analyzes patterns of communications inside our country to determine whether any suspicious contacts are taking place. Just knowing who is talking to whom, how often, and when they communicate can tell us a lot.

Strategypage explains this better than you'll get from the press:


The recent controversy over the National Security Agency "eavesdropping" on Americans with the assistance of AT&T, Verizon, and BellSouth, is another case of media distortion. First of all is the fact that the NSA is not even "eavesdropping", they are acquiring phone records. This is part of a form of communications intelligence called traffic analysis.

Traffic analysis does not involve listening to words. Instead it tracks the pattern of communications, and has long been recognized as a valuable means of gathering intelligence. Changes in the patterns can tell the NSA (or any other agency) that something is up (through an increased amount of traffic), or who the "big fish" are (simply by seeing who is talking to whom). This effort can even locate new terrorists without knowing what has been said. If a known terrorist starts having lengthy conversations with someone new, traffic analysis can pick that up. If the communications suddenly stop, it can be a sign that the bad guys are on the move, or they are about to attack.


Really, it may seem like I just reflexively defend the administration. But it isn't true. For one thing I only blog on the war, defense issues, and foreign policy. And second, within these areas the Left seems to think that any effort more strenuous than a firmly worded request to please stop killing us is out of bounds. If it wasn't for one plastic turkey issue after another, I'd be more inclined to criticize. But how can I not defend the administration on what are at their core, simply stupid charges?

When the initial revelations about eavesdropping came out at the end of last year, I was prepared to be upset and was angry that we might have done what the press said we were doing. The president had best have an awfully good explanation for this, I thought.

But as I read the news accounts spiced with outrage, I wondered what the heck is wrong with you people? This is reading the enemy's mail and is not domestic eavesdropping no matter how often you call it that! (Yes, NPR, I'm talking about your clueless operatives.)

And so when the latest came out, after so many plastic turkey issues that the other side brings up as outrages, I didn't even blink at the new NSA revelations. Sure enough, as details came out, it is no big deal. As I wrote:

It is very sad that reasonable attempts to protect our people while we win the war are taken by administration opponents as unreasonable civil rights violations. And bizarre, too. But really, reactions like this stem from the simple fact that many on the Left simply don't believe in their hearts that we are at war.

No big deal we do it--big deal that asshats decided to reveal it. It is something of use to our enemies to know.

If you wanted to do a traffic analysis of the Left, which complains about any effort our government takes to fight the enemy, you'd have to conclude--even without reading the specifics--that they just don't think we are at war. Or want the enemy to win. I have little patience for either attitude.

Next plastic turkey issue, please.