March 04, 2003
Too Much Information?
I'm glad they caught the Al Qaeda mastermind in Pakistan. What I don't get is all the information the press is reporting about it -- and I assume the info is being provided by our own government. If you honestly think this guy knows who, what, and where, wouldn't you like to keep his capture quiet until you can pick up the people he knows about? You have to figure the publicity is going to be like turning the lights on cockroaches - there's a whole lot of scurrying going on right now. And by letting on that computers and documents were also seized, every Al Qaeda operative has to figure they've been compromised - they can't rely on Mr. Mohammed's not talking. I suppose it could be that the disruption, uncertainty, and fear caused by the announcement outweighed the possibility of capturing more operatives; it could be that our intellegance agencies figured Al Qaeda knew and could inform it's people anyway even if there were no public report; and maybe it was felt that a public report would cause a burst in bottom up message traffic as operatives checked in with higher ups that would be more enlightning than a burst of top down if the higher ups were informing the troops. And of course, we can't be told why the info was released or it would defeat the purpose of releasing it.
Posted by Kevin Murphy at March 4, 2003 12:16 PM | War On TerrorKevin -
I read somewhere on CNN.com that Pakistan spilled the beans first about the al Qaeda capture. A CIA guy was quoted as wishing Pakistan had given them at least 24 hours to capture the operatives in America. But noooo, they announced it right away.
Beyond that, I completely agree with you. If I have to wait a week or a month to hear the news and a few more bad guys get captured because of the delay, then keep it quiet!
Maybe the USA figured that Paksitan had already done the damage. Then why the torrent of follow-up information, like you say? "Loose lips sink ships." Mum's the word. Average Americans don't need to know this stuff right away.
Carl
Posted by: Carl Drews at March 4, 2003 02:23 PMKevin, here's another take on the publicity surrounding the arrest:
http://www.cnn.com/2003/US/03/03/otsc.mccann/index.html
>CNN Anchor Leon HARRIS: Let me ask you, first off, a question that came up earlier this morning: Do you think it might have been a mistake to announce the arrest so publicly, which may have tipped off some of the other cells that may [otherwise have been] easy to uncover now that you have gotten Mohammed and his computers?
CNN security analyst Kelly MCCANN: Perhaps. Sometimes what's conducted is called an "exciter mission," and basically that's when you release kind of critical information that might excite a network where we are poised to look at signals intelligence that might erupt from the disclosure. So I think that in this war on terrorism, nothing is being done happenstance.
So the "cockroach theory" suggests that when you turn on the light all the cockroaches scurry around for cover. But while they are scurrying you can squash quite a few of them, especially if you're all ready in a good position with a fly swatter.
The publicity was either really smart or really stupid - nothing in between. And al Qaeda will never know which it is.
Posted by: Carl Drews at March 4, 2003 02:59 PMThanks Carl.
I just came across a USA today story saying the same thing about Pakistan spilling the beans.
I'd like to think we don't know what's going on because then neither does Al Qaeda. So you shouldn't be able to tell if it was a screw up, or we leaked the info and then blamed Pakistan to throw Al Qaeda off - to make it look like a mistake.
By the way, the 20 year reunion book lists you as deceased. Thought you might like to know that.
