User:George Swan/sandbox/Chatter (signals intelligence): Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>George Swan
(inline references to <ref> format)
imported>George Swan
m (fix refs)
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
'''Chatter''' is a term used in the [[United States]] "[[war on terror]]".  [[intelligence (information gathering)|Intelligence]] officials, not having better metrics, monitor the '''volume''' of the electronic communication, to or from suspected terrorists, to determine whether there is cause for alarm.  They referred to the electronic communication as chatter.<ref name=Cnn20021010>
'''Chatter''' is a term used in the [[United States]] "[[war on terror]]".  [[intelligence (espionage)|Intelligence]] officials, not having better metrics, monitor the '''volume''' of the electronic communication, to or from suspected terrorists, to determine whether there is cause for alarm.  They referred to the electronic communication as chatter.<ref name=Cnn20021010>
{{cite news
{{cite news
| url=http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/10/terror.roundup/  
| url=http://archives.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/10/10/terror.roundup/  

Revision as of 06:14, 21 November 2007

This is a draft in User space, not yet ready to go to Citizendium's main space, and not meant to be cited. The {{subpages}} template is designed to be used within article clusters and their related pages.
It will not function on User pages.

Chatter is a term used in the United States "war on terror". Intelligence officials, not having better metrics, monitor the volume of the electronic communication, to or from suspected terrorists, to determine whether there is cause for alarm. They referred to the electronic communication as chatter.[1]

Monitoring "chatter" is an example of traffic analysis a sub-field of signals intelligence.Template:Ref Intelligence specialists believe that they can learn significant information by methodically monitoring who and when suspects communicate. Even if they don't think they understand the real meaning of what suspected terrorists are saying to one another, they regard an increase in the number of the messages as a significant cause for alarm. Paradoxically, they also regard a decrease in the number of messages as a cause for alarm.[2]

Some incidents, like the capture of the "Algerian Six", were triggered largely by an increase in "chatter".

References