This is the second NYTimes article I've seen that has suggested that the NSA was collecting information on a group while that group was planning an attack, but that the collection or the analysis was not sufficient to stop the attack. (The other article was on the Mumbai terrorist attack).
This is interesting and you could look at it a number of different ways:
- Collecting data is one thing, but understanding what it means is incredibly challenging and the NSA might not be doing a great job.
- Even when they can't prevent an attack, there is still value in having this data so that they can attribute the attack and understand something about the motives and methods of the attackers.
- Or "national security" doesn't mean what normal English-speaking humans think it means. The hack was no threat to the reigning industrial/government structure or the dollar.
This is interesting and you could look at it a number of different ways:
- Collecting data is one thing, but understanding what it means is incredibly challenging and the NSA might not be doing a great job.
- Even when they can't prevent an attack, there is still value in having this data so that they can attribute the attack and understand something about the motives and methods of the attackers.