Quote:
Originally Posted by CaptainCrunch
I'm going directly off of their mandate which covers Aeronautical intelligence gathering, Maritime Navigation and mission planning for the DND. I would think that FAA investigators would be the experts in terms of crash effects and patterns. We're not really arguing on the last sentence where the FBI has jurisdiction and any relevant data would come to them for analysis. But I fail to see how signal intelligence pertains to crash residue on the ground. You could argue that if there was communication between the planes for example and an Al Queda source that they would be involved in that, but there wasn't. There was however communication before 9/11 as a coordination point, and immediately after when Al Queda was sending congratulations to each other through the internet and Satellite tecnology.
The DIA is more focused on threat analysis, so any data that comes out that indicates future possible threats would be their mandate which would be shared by the FBI, but I don't see how they would be involved in investigating a crash site.
|
CC, the NGA is not just about signal intelligence; it collects geospatial intelligence, whether that is collected through satellites, aircraft, databases, or whatever. I'm sure the FBI worked with the FAA on these matters; but to say the NSA wasn't involved I just can't believe that.
And again, my point that I've made already is that the NSA relies on the FBI to conduct homeland foreign intelligence activities, which could pertain to signal analysis if need be. Therefore, there two agencies are linked, which then implicates the NSA in an overall FBI investigation where such investigation is necessary. This is the point I'm making, which ties back to the argument made earlier in this thread that any other agency's involvement in the Pentagon clean-up is "insignificant". It just isn't, as these agencies are tied together for collection and analysis. This is my high-level point.