After 9/11, there was this big push to make it easier for different departments and agencies of the government to share information. The thought was that 9/11 could have been stopped with easier communication between the various agencies.
The problem with this is when you break down those communication walls, the information becomes more vulnerable to being intercepted.
Good point, but managed communication should have been the goal, and not a contentious divide that left Country more vulnerable than necessary.
>After 9/11, there was this big push to make it easier for different departments and agencies of the government to share information.
And you know what happened to that “big push”? Jack Shit.
>The thought was that 9/11 could have been stopped with easier communication between the various agencies.
The truth is it probably would have.
>The problem with this is when you break down those communication walls, the information becomes more vulnerable to being intercepted.
But the communication walls WEREN’T broken down. If anything they were built higher and more maze-like. Why?
Well, if your agency is obviously doing the same intel work some other agency is, then when budget-cuts comes around you have to justify your agency’s funding better than the other group.
But by not sharing information, or by poor organization of it {ie hiding in plain sight}, you have less chance of being called on it. In fact, you could say “refer to my boss’s report #XX71D.b” and fill your justification with such refs.
The information wasn’t intercepted. It was copied off a govt computer and carried out on a USB key and CD ROM.
Sharing wasn’t the problem. An utter lack of controls over who had access to the information is the problem.