Friday, August 27, 2004
Replacement program for CAPPSII to begin in November
From epic.org:
Lots of links to CAPPSII hearings. Make that old links. Looks like EPIC has been involved in testifying before Congress against the CAPPSII on privacy issues. Little surprise there, but they may have had some effect.
Maybe the TSA will have settled these issues for "Secure Flight."
Update: Another source explains a bit:
Looks like a win for the privacy lobby. I hope the decrease in effectiveness was worth that much in privacy.
Update: More details:
And a tie-in: "Marcia Hofmann, staff counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said, “Our biggest concern about the Secure Flight program is how passengers whose names match the watch lists and are improperly kept off flights they should be on will be able to clear their names.” "
The 9-11 Commission had suggested the implementation of CAPPSII. Oh, well. Secure Flight must be the closest thing the DHS/TSA can manage to pass the privacy concerns. I don't recall the Commission giving so much leeway to the privacy lobbies, though. And from the language about backing off of the "algorith" method, this seems to be quite a serious blow to the practice of data mining.
That might preclude a whole group of companies with interesting-sounding data mining positions. Nuts.
TSA to Test New Passenger Prescreening Program
The Transportation Security Administration has announced it will begin testing Secure Flight, a new passenger prescreening system, in November. The program, which is intended to replace the now-defunct CAPPS II, will compare passenger records to expanded "selectee" and "no fly" lists already in use. Passengers whose records match names on the lists will be subject to commercial background checks to verify their identities. The agency stated that it plans to have a redress process for individuals improperly flagged by Secure Flight, but it is unclear how this process will work. For more information, see EPIC's Passenger Profiling Page. (Aug. 26)
Lots of links to CAPPSII hearings. Make that old links. Looks like EPIC has been involved in testifying before Congress against the CAPPSII on privacy issues. Little surprise there, but they may have had some effect.
Maybe the TSA will have settled these issues for "Secure Flight."
Update: Another source explains a bit:
Unlike the previous proposal, the new system will only look for known or suspected terrorists, not other law enforcement violators. In addition, it will include a redress mechanism, where people can resolve questions if they believe they have been unfairly or incorrectly selected for additional screening.
The current system screens an average of 16 percent, or one out of every six air passengers. TSA officials say the enhanced program will cut that number down to 5 percent or 6 percent. Lockheed Martin Corp. will continue to work with the TSA on this project, despite revisions.
Looks like a win for the privacy lobby. I hope the decrease in effectiveness was worth that much in privacy.
Update: More details:
TSA Administrator Adm. David Stone said during a conference call this afternoon that while CAPPS II relied on algorithms that would assess the likelihood that an individual would be a terrorist threat, Secure Flight would check passenger data against terrorist databases maintained by the interagency Terrorist Screening Center, the FBI and the intelligence community.
“This moves away from building an algorithm that indicates a person should be screened [or prevented from flying] to using databases that have been vetted by the TSC and TSA,” Stone said in a conference call with reporters.
He emphasized that Secure Flight would reduce incidents in which travelers are needlessly checked, and flights delayed, because the passengers are confused with individuals whose names now appear on the CAPPS no-fly list. Such incidents have prompted a class action lawsuit against TSA.
Another advantage of Secure Flight over CAPPS is that TSA itself will check the passengers, so airline personnel no longer will have access to confidential or classified information about terrorists.
In addition, TSA screening officials will have access to information about terrorists that the federal government has never shared with airlines. Stone said that the classified terrorist data will be more secure because TSA officials alone will be handling it.
TSA also plans to launch a program under which travelers who are barred from flying will have a clear appeal process. Stone emphasized that TSA plans to work hard to protect the privacy rights of the traveling public throughout the process.
And a tie-in: "Marcia Hofmann, staff counsel for the Electronic Privacy Information Center, said, “Our biggest concern about the Secure Flight program is how passengers whose names match the watch lists and are improperly kept off flights they should be on will be able to clear their names.” "
The 9-11 Commission had suggested the implementation of CAPPSII. Oh, well. Secure Flight must be the closest thing the DHS/TSA can manage to pass the privacy concerns. I don't recall the Commission giving so much leeway to the privacy lobbies, though. And from the language about backing off of the "algorith" method, this seems to be quite a serious blow to the practice of data mining.
That might preclude a whole group of companies with interesting-sounding data mining positions. Nuts.
Pre-Incident Planning
Pre-Incident Planning
Chapter 2 Outline
CHAPTER 2
PRE-INCIDENT PLANNING
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction to Risk Assessment
There is no other area which needs greater cooperation between law enforcement and the private sector than in terrorism defense. Questions do arise, but they typically are about costs and potential benefits. But moral obligation to protect people can’t be measured in dollars. And actually, there is a legal obligation also—for law enforcement as well as the private sector (“foreseeability” in vicarious liability statutes and case law).
A defense plan is a guide to dealing with terrorist threats on a pragmatic level and best when reviewed and updated periodically, whether developed by law enforcement or private sector or joint effort, ideally.
Defense plan has 3 component areas—pre-incident, incident and post-incident.
Pre-incident planning—the planning, anticipation and “what if” modeling and intelligence-gathering that can be done in advance. Cooperation between law enf and private sector best.
Incident planning—development of a course of action for the occurrence or even threat of suspected, potential or actual terrorist action. Communication between law enf, private sector target company and public safety officials is again important.
Post-incident planning—handling events in the aftermath of a bomb threat, explosion, hostage-taking or other attack. Also deals with emergencies, physical damage and getting operations back to normal as quickly and safely as possible. Cooperation... Many companies keep disaster recovery plans (DRPs). Some may enable relocation to a temporary satellite location.
Structuring a Defense Plan
Pre-incident planning involves info-gathering, risk analysis, organization, training, determining logistical needs and purchasing necessary supplies and equipment.
Purpose of planning--Establishes the amount of level of potential risk to which targets may be exposed. Once the risk is assessed, then policy and procedures must be in place to implement the policy.
Incident segment is an operations manual for handling the initial phases of a terrorist attack. It explains what actions are to be taken, when, who, how.
Post-incident activity includes assisting representatives of authorized agencies in the investigation as well as restoring the location to normal. Also involves metrics for assessing the long-term effects of the incident. Also provides a way of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the defense response.
Information-Gathering
Information-gathering is both the easiest and the most difficult of tasks. Easy because much information already exists but there is no certainty as to what kind of information will be useful, how much information is enough and how often they ought to be updated.
Sources include files, letters, official documents, in the records of municipal and other governmental agencies, libraries, databases and similar sources. Internet resources such as Google and Nexis Lexis can be used together with links found to all the above that are accessible online. But while security professionals have access to these internet resources, so now do the terrorists.
Private security may not require the amount and depth of information that the law enforcement community requires. OTOH, corporate security may require more geographically-focused data, especially when foreign operations are involved. Anyway, needs to be well organized and easily accessible.
Three general categories of information:
1 TARGETS.
Two categories of information on targets: First are the types of targets that are being attacked, both at home and abroad. Secondly is the type or types of facilities and what it takes to get them up and running again after an emergency situation.
Whether gathered for a municipality, a quasipublic corporation or a private company, the data are simply an enumeration of assets:
Human resources, buildings and real estate, inventory, other physical assets; financial assets; and intangibles such as good will, name recognition, and publicity value (intellectual property rights?). In other words, targets include anything that could be burned, bombed, stolen, damaged, contaminated, taken over, occupied, kidnapped or held hostage.
All need to be listed or inventoried, and major characteristics identified so that it can be assessed, filed, updated, copied, stored (backup copy offsite) or handled by the appropriate policy during the risk analysis phase. Example of inventory:
--Individuals have personnel files with home addresses, medical histories, dependents’ names and name of next of kin.
--Buildings have blueprints, floor plans, drawings of electrical, heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems, fire alarm and other security systems.
--Vehicles have operating and repair manuals.
--Real estate has site descriptions and dimensions in the deed and title files.
Target identification ought to include rankings of vulnerability and information on getting it up and running.
2 TARGET PROFILE
This refers to subjective information dealing with people’s perceptions of all the identified potential targets. For a municipality, targets could include city hall, schools, post office, etc. Law enforcement would be similar. Corporate targets would include considerations of the company’s image, its suppliers, customers and investors. Individuals within the company can have symbolic or strategic importance. An electric utility may provide excellent security for corporate headquarters and main generating plants, but not the substations, service trucks, payment stations and transmission lines. Example—oil supply trucks and pipelines in Iraq. Cost/benefit analyses ought to be done for these even if it is determined to be too expensive.
In devising a target profile, it is imperative to include the quality of responding emergency services: local police, fire, medical and other emergency agencies. Are they volunteer or professional? Are there bomb techs or hostage negotiators? What is the response time? Cooperative agreements? Are local hospital facilities adequate? What are the response time for local power, gas and phone companies? These factors will help to determine and evaluate the risk potential.
3 TERRORISTS
“Know your enemy.” Much information comes from police and other law enforcement agency files and databases. But much information is also available from professional security publications, their archives, databases, newsletters and in well-circulated publications available in large libraries. The internet allows access to governmental and private resources, including the FBI, Department of State, CIA and others. Organizations maintain websites such as the American Federation of Scientists as well as weblogs that discuss or track terrorists and their political activities. (See http://provideforthecommondefense.blogspot.com/ for links) Terrorist groups and their sympathizers may also maintain web sites providing possible clues to current activities, causes and specific references to enemies and targets. Host countries for terrorists typically have government-run or controlled websites which have much in common with terrorist motives and public statements.
Radicals and terrorist groups often disseminate tracts and manifestos even during quiet periods, when they may be proselytizing. Private security professionals and local law enforcement officials can ask: what are the current trends in terrorism? Which terrorist or radical groups are active in the area? Which militant groups, political cadres or ethnic populations might be present? Are any of these from former homelands where there is conflict? Examples include the Middle East, Caucuses, Balkans, etc. An easy tactic in information-gathering is to monitor protest letters and websites from groups or individuals associated with it. Almost every radical group, both in the US and abroad, began as a concerned citizens’ organization that was subsequently radicalized or became splintered into radical groups. This all is like a jigsaw puzzle with the number of pieces as well as the finished picture unknown.
Target Analysis
Accurately assessing the likelihood of any particular person, piece of property or service becoming the target of a terrorist attack is one of the more difficult challenges facing defense planners. Overestimating the threat wastes money, personnel, time and effort. Underestimating the threat could result in injury or death as well as millions of dollars in damages, ransoms or liability judgments.
TARGET OR THREAT ANALYSIS: the likelihood of becoming a target AND whether or not defenses are sufficient to discourage potential attacks or to protect individuals and organizations in liability suits.
Terrorist attacks are directed at US government facilities but US private sector organizations sustain the largest number of attacks.
A business entity should consider these concepts in conducting a target analysis:
1 A company heavily involved in the military-industrial complex. This includes defense contractors and suppliers in the defense industry.
2 Businesses working with advanced technologies like weapons or defense systems.
3 Financial institutions, especially those involved in finance programs. Examples are loans to governments with which the terrorists are opposed.
4 Petrochemical or environmental industry. (South America, Middle East, etc.)
5 Utility companies, like power, water, communications like phone or cellular.
6 Companies with manufacturing operations in the third world. “Exploitation” or “low wages” are common claims.
7 Companies with operations in politically sensitive countries and current hot spots.
8 Companies on the “wrong side of emotional political issues.” Can include forest
product companies, abortion or birth control companies, consumer product
9 Corporations that have become symbolic of America or capitalism due to their size, history, market dominance. Examples are Coke, Macs and entertainment.
(Never mind this freaking line.)
Law enforcement officials with these types of companies or organizations located in their jurisdictions could ask these questions:
1 Was it a previous target?
2 Ever been mentioned or demonstrated against in publicly in a bad way? Could be in radical literature, websites or publications.
3 Affiliated with companies that answer “yes” to 1 and 2 above?
4 Supplier of goods or services to the above?
5 Ship goods through “sensitive” countries?
So be comprehensive in target analysis. Examine suppliers, customers, distribution networks, end-users, financial supporters, even public statements and personal politics of leading officials. Terrorist groups and their “issues” can be public or ongoing below the radar in long-standing “grievances.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization
Organization of a defense plan requires:
1 Assignment of authority or a chain of command
2 Assignment of responsibility along the chain.
Chain of command:
Terrorist defense plan could call for a variation in the routine and a crisis team taking over control. Could include moving decision-making to a command center that is better protected or has better communications at least until the arrival of public safety officials who will then assume command of the situation.
Structure of the chain of command can take many forms. More important is that the chain has been planned, exists, is in place and everyone is aware of it. An important factor is that the lines of communication be as short and direct as possible (radio problems at WTC).
Responsibility along the chain:
Ought to be defined so that each person in the chain is aware and well-0chooled in their responsibilities as well as in the limits of their authority. Training ought to include drills and quizzes and “what if” modeling. The responsibilities ought to be in a written defense plan.
Until public safety units arrive, a crisis team is required.
--first-aid squad or fire brigade.
--evacuation team
--bomb search team
--consequence management unit, to aid with medical emergencies, evaluating the condition of the area and assisting authorities with their investigation.
--risk assessment team, which meets to plan defenses and evaluate threats as they arise.
In organizing, avoid overlap, keep in mind full time versus part timers, and look for supervisory skills.
Training
Training in terrorist defense plan responsibilities must apply to all participants at all levels, since they represent a coordinated unit and must have teamwork founded on a thorough understanding of individual assignments.
Training sessions: complete explanation of the defense plan, theory and detailed application. Classroom sessions followed by tests and drills ought to be critiqued, evaluated and adjusted; a full-scale crisis simulation conducted; then regular testing of plan components.
A big deficiency in terrorist defense planning and crisis management is the training of replacement personnel. Newcomers need to be integrated.
Terrorist Tactics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing a defense plan requires knowing what you are defending against. The four most important tactical operations involving terrorists, in order of relative frequency:
1 Bombings
2 Assassinations and assaults
3 Kidnapping
4 Hostage-taking/skyjacking/barricade situations
Bombings are the most frequent—up to 80% of terrorist-related violence. Most popular are massive vehicle-borne explosive devices involving a suicide attack. Assassinations etc tend to be more selective to include symbolic targets (ETA). Kidnappings have included that of high government officials, ambassadors, etc, to embarrass local governments. Business executives and their families also are targets. Hostage-taking, skyjacking and barricade situations are the most spectacular but relatively infrequent, like 9-11 and the Israeli athletes in ’72.
Multiple coincidental events are a favorite tactic in an effort to separate the defense’s resources. The counter-tactic is to try to sever the terrorists’ lines of communication—thus dividing and conquering.
Risk Analysis
Target analysis was discussed previously, with guidelines for assessing whether or not a potential target is a likely target. In risk analysis, an attempt is made to EVALUATE that likelihood and ASSIGN a degree of risk to it.
RISK ANALYSIS:
--ascertains how high the probability is of one of these dangers occurring (pre-)
--how well the organization can respond (incident)
--how well the organization can resume normal operations after an incident (post-)
One thing to be determined is the extent of the organization’s exposure, which could determine the loss or damage. A branch office or facility (chain retail store) is more susceptible than the central office. Another consideration is what could cause injury to employees.
Risk exposure considerations involving employees can affect the ability to function smoothly. Kidnapping or killing a company head can disrupt business and reduce the stock price of a company or affect the public image of the company. Perceived lack of sensitivity with low level employee situations can cause problems with labor or public image.
Risk can be described by its potential for occurrence and its capacity for loss, including individual life and interruption of activity.
One risk formula: L=D + R + I – IC (2B)
L=loss; D=direct cost; R= replacement cost; I= indirect cost; IC= insurance compensation (B=?)
Risk Avoidance
Risk avoidance applies especially to individuals. Risk avoidance involves identifying risks and neutralizing or eliminating the hazards creating the risk. EG, in a kidnapping-prone area, increase training for local law enforcement. Local companies with likely kidnapping potential could subsidize this training.
Another method of avoiding risk is to harden the target. Egress and ingress to buildings can be controlled; protective barriers can be used and perimeters bolstered to segregate areas of public access; detection devices can be employed (security cameras, etc); and defensive behavioral techniques employed by high-target personnel.
In the end, the goal can be seen as forcing terrorists to shift the focus of their attack on someone else.
Hostage/Kidnap Defense
Likely targets:
--wealthy or high status
--travelers to politically unstable areas of the world
--particularly corporate executives and overseas employees of those companies described in “Target Analysis”: defense contractors, “wrong” countries or issues.
Awareness is the first step of an individual’s defense plan to avoid being taken captive, especially during the highest risk activity—traveling.
Defensive travel tactics include:
1 Taking direct flights on US carriers
2 Checking in early and going to the secure area and staying clear of lockers, windows, etc, that could become shrapnel in the event of a bombing.
3 Use carriers from neutral countries or those with high security, or both, if can’t use US carrier.
4 Avoid aisle seats and up front, since terrorist skyjackers who roam the aisles would likely grab these passengers.
Chapter 2 Outline
CHAPTER 2
PRE-INCIDENT PLANNING
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Introduction to Risk Assessment
There is no other area which needs greater cooperation between law enforcement and the private sector than in terrorism defense. Questions do arise, but they typically are about costs and potential benefits. But moral obligation to protect people can’t be measured in dollars. And actually, there is a legal obligation also—for law enforcement as well as the private sector (“foreseeability” in vicarious liability statutes and case law).
A defense plan is a guide to dealing with terrorist threats on a pragmatic level and best when reviewed and updated periodically, whether developed by law enforcement or private sector or joint effort, ideally.
Defense plan has 3 component areas—pre-incident, incident and post-incident.
Pre-incident planning—the planning, anticipation and “what if” modeling and intelligence-gathering that can be done in advance. Cooperation between law enf and private sector best.
Incident planning—development of a course of action for the occurrence or even threat of suspected, potential or actual terrorist action. Communication between law enf, private sector target company and public safety officials is again important.
Post-incident planning—handling events in the aftermath of a bomb threat, explosion, hostage-taking or other attack. Also deals with emergencies, physical damage and getting operations back to normal as quickly and safely as possible. Cooperation... Many companies keep disaster recovery plans (DRPs). Some may enable relocation to a temporary satellite location.
Structuring a Defense Plan
Pre-incident planning involves info-gathering, risk analysis, organization, training, determining logistical needs and purchasing necessary supplies and equipment.
Purpose of planning--Establishes the amount of level of potential risk to which targets may be exposed. Once the risk is assessed, then policy and procedures must be in place to implement the policy.
Incident segment is an operations manual for handling the initial phases of a terrorist attack. It explains what actions are to be taken, when, who, how.
Post-incident activity includes assisting representatives of authorized agencies in the investigation as well as restoring the location to normal. Also involves metrics for assessing the long-term effects of the incident. Also provides a way of evaluating the strengths and weaknesses of the defense response.
Information-Gathering
Information-gathering is both the easiest and the most difficult of tasks. Easy because much information already exists but there is no certainty as to what kind of information will be useful, how much information is enough and how often they ought to be updated.
Sources include files, letters, official documents, in the records of municipal and other governmental agencies, libraries, databases and similar sources. Internet resources such as Google and Nexis Lexis can be used together with links found to all the above that are accessible online. But while security professionals have access to these internet resources, so now do the terrorists.
Private security may not require the amount and depth of information that the law enforcement community requires. OTOH, corporate security may require more geographically-focused data, especially when foreign operations are involved. Anyway, needs to be well organized and easily accessible.
Three general categories of information:
1 TARGETS.
Two categories of information on targets: First are the types of targets that are being attacked, both at home and abroad. Secondly is the type or types of facilities and what it takes to get them up and running again after an emergency situation.
Whether gathered for a municipality, a quasipublic corporation or a private company, the data are simply an enumeration of assets:
Human resources, buildings and real estate, inventory, other physical assets; financial assets; and intangibles such as good will, name recognition, and publicity value (intellectual property rights?). In other words, targets include anything that could be burned, bombed, stolen, damaged, contaminated, taken over, occupied, kidnapped or held hostage.
All need to be listed or inventoried, and major characteristics identified so that it can be assessed, filed, updated, copied, stored (backup copy offsite) or handled by the appropriate policy during the risk analysis phase. Example of inventory:
--Individuals have personnel files with home addresses, medical histories, dependents’ names and name of next of kin.
--Buildings have blueprints, floor plans, drawings of electrical, heating, ventilation and air-conditioning systems, fire alarm and other security systems.
--Vehicles have operating and repair manuals.
--Real estate has site descriptions and dimensions in the deed and title files.
Target identification ought to include rankings of vulnerability and information on getting it up and running.
2 TARGET PROFILE
This refers to subjective information dealing with people’s perceptions of all the identified potential targets. For a municipality, targets could include city hall, schools, post office, etc. Law enforcement would be similar. Corporate targets would include considerations of the company’s image, its suppliers, customers and investors. Individuals within the company can have symbolic or strategic importance. An electric utility may provide excellent security for corporate headquarters and main generating plants, but not the substations, service trucks, payment stations and transmission lines. Example—oil supply trucks and pipelines in Iraq. Cost/benefit analyses ought to be done for these even if it is determined to be too expensive.
In devising a target profile, it is imperative to include the quality of responding emergency services: local police, fire, medical and other emergency agencies. Are they volunteer or professional? Are there bomb techs or hostage negotiators? What is the response time? Cooperative agreements? Are local hospital facilities adequate? What are the response time for local power, gas and phone companies? These factors will help to determine and evaluate the risk potential.
3 TERRORISTS
“Know your enemy.” Much information comes from police and other law enforcement agency files and databases. But much information is also available from professional security publications, their archives, databases, newsletters and in well-circulated publications available in large libraries. The internet allows access to governmental and private resources, including the FBI, Department of State, CIA and others. Organizations maintain websites such as the American Federation of Scientists as well as weblogs that discuss or track terrorists and their political activities. (See http://provideforthecommondefense.blogspot.com/ for links) Terrorist groups and their sympathizers may also maintain web sites providing possible clues to current activities, causes and specific references to enemies and targets. Host countries for terrorists typically have government-run or controlled websites which have much in common with terrorist motives and public statements.
Radicals and terrorist groups often disseminate tracts and manifestos even during quiet periods, when they may be proselytizing. Private security professionals and local law enforcement officials can ask: what are the current trends in terrorism? Which terrorist or radical groups are active in the area? Which militant groups, political cadres or ethnic populations might be present? Are any of these from former homelands where there is conflict? Examples include the Middle East, Caucuses, Balkans, etc. An easy tactic in information-gathering is to monitor protest letters and websites from groups or individuals associated with it. Almost every radical group, both in the US and abroad, began as a concerned citizens’ organization that was subsequently radicalized or became splintered into radical groups. This all is like a jigsaw puzzle with the number of pieces as well as the finished picture unknown.
Target Analysis
Accurately assessing the likelihood of any particular person, piece of property or service becoming the target of a terrorist attack is one of the more difficult challenges facing defense planners. Overestimating the threat wastes money, personnel, time and effort. Underestimating the threat could result in injury or death as well as millions of dollars in damages, ransoms or liability judgments.
TARGET OR THREAT ANALYSIS: the likelihood of becoming a target AND whether or not defenses are sufficient to discourage potential attacks or to protect individuals and organizations in liability suits.
Terrorist attacks are directed at US government facilities but US private sector organizations sustain the largest number of attacks.
A business entity should consider these concepts in conducting a target analysis:
1 A company heavily involved in the military-industrial complex. This includes defense contractors and suppliers in the defense industry.
2 Businesses working with advanced technologies like weapons or defense systems.
3 Financial institutions, especially those involved in finance programs. Examples are loans to governments with which the terrorists are opposed.
4 Petrochemical or environmental industry. (South America, Middle East, etc.)
5 Utility companies, like power, water, communications like phone or cellular.
6 Companies with manufacturing operations in the third world. “Exploitation” or “low wages” are common claims.
7 Companies with operations in politically sensitive countries and current hot spots.
8 Companies on the “wrong side of emotional political issues.” Can include forest
product companies, abortion or birth control companies, consumer product
9 Corporations that have become symbolic of America or capitalism due to their size, history, market dominance. Examples are Coke, Macs and entertainment.
(Never mind this freaking line.)
Law enforcement officials with these types of companies or organizations located in their jurisdictions could ask these questions:
1 Was it a previous target?
2 Ever been mentioned or demonstrated against in publicly in a bad way? Could be in radical literature, websites or publications.
3 Affiliated with companies that answer “yes” to 1 and 2 above?
4 Supplier of goods or services to the above?
5 Ship goods through “sensitive” countries?
So be comprehensive in target analysis. Examine suppliers, customers, distribution networks, end-users, financial supporters, even public statements and personal politics of leading officials. Terrorist groups and their “issues” can be public or ongoing below the radar in long-standing “grievances.”
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Organization
Organization of a defense plan requires:
1 Assignment of authority or a chain of command
2 Assignment of responsibility along the chain.
Chain of command:
Terrorist defense plan could call for a variation in the routine and a crisis team taking over control. Could include moving decision-making to a command center that is better protected or has better communications at least until the arrival of public safety officials who will then assume command of the situation.
Structure of the chain of command can take many forms. More important is that the chain has been planned, exists, is in place and everyone is aware of it. An important factor is that the lines of communication be as short and direct as possible (radio problems at WTC).
Responsibility along the chain:
Ought to be defined so that each person in the chain is aware and well-0chooled in their responsibilities as well as in the limits of their authority. Training ought to include drills and quizzes and “what if” modeling. The responsibilities ought to be in a written defense plan.
Until public safety units arrive, a crisis team is required.
--first-aid squad or fire brigade.
--evacuation team
--bomb search team
--consequence management unit, to aid with medical emergencies, evaluating the condition of the area and assisting authorities with their investigation.
--risk assessment team, which meets to plan defenses and evaluate threats as they arise.
In organizing, avoid overlap, keep in mind full time versus part timers, and look for supervisory skills.
Training
Training in terrorist defense plan responsibilities must apply to all participants at all levels, since they represent a coordinated unit and must have teamwork founded on a thorough understanding of individual assignments.
Training sessions: complete explanation of the defense plan, theory and detailed application. Classroom sessions followed by tests and drills ought to be critiqued, evaluated and adjusted; a full-scale crisis simulation conducted; then regular testing of plan components.
A big deficiency in terrorist defense planning and crisis management is the training of replacement personnel. Newcomers need to be integrated.
Terrorist Tactics
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Establishing a defense plan requires knowing what you are defending against. The four most important tactical operations involving terrorists, in order of relative frequency:
1 Bombings
2 Assassinations and assaults
3 Kidnapping
4 Hostage-taking/skyjacking/barricade situations
Bombings are the most frequent—up to 80% of terrorist-related violence. Most popular are massive vehicle-borne explosive devices involving a suicide attack. Assassinations etc tend to be more selective to include symbolic targets (ETA). Kidnappings have included that of high government officials, ambassadors, etc, to embarrass local governments. Business executives and their families also are targets. Hostage-taking, skyjacking and barricade situations are the most spectacular but relatively infrequent, like 9-11 and the Israeli athletes in ’72.
Multiple coincidental events are a favorite tactic in an effort to separate the defense’s resources. The counter-tactic is to try to sever the terrorists’ lines of communication—thus dividing and conquering.
Risk Analysis
Target analysis was discussed previously, with guidelines for assessing whether or not a potential target is a likely target. In risk analysis, an attempt is made to EVALUATE that likelihood and ASSIGN a degree of risk to it.
RISK ANALYSIS:
--ascertains how high the probability is of one of these dangers occurring (pre-)
--how well the organization can respond (incident)
--how well the organization can resume normal operations after an incident (post-)
One thing to be determined is the extent of the organization’s exposure, which could determine the loss or damage. A branch office or facility (chain retail store) is more susceptible than the central office. Another consideration is what could cause injury to employees.
Risk exposure considerations involving employees can affect the ability to function smoothly. Kidnapping or killing a company head can disrupt business and reduce the stock price of a company or affect the public image of the company. Perceived lack of sensitivity with low level employee situations can cause problems with labor or public image.
Risk can be described by its potential for occurrence and its capacity for loss, including individual life and interruption of activity.
One risk formula: L=D + R + I – IC (2B)
L=loss; D=direct cost; R= replacement cost; I= indirect cost; IC= insurance compensation (B=?)
Risk Avoidance
Risk avoidance applies especially to individuals. Risk avoidance involves identifying risks and neutralizing or eliminating the hazards creating the risk. EG, in a kidnapping-prone area, increase training for local law enforcement. Local companies with likely kidnapping potential could subsidize this training.
Another method of avoiding risk is to harden the target. Egress and ingress to buildings can be controlled; protective barriers can be used and perimeters bolstered to segregate areas of public access; detection devices can be employed (security cameras, etc); and defensive behavioral techniques employed by high-target personnel.
In the end, the goal can be seen as forcing terrorists to shift the focus of their attack on someone else.
Hostage/Kidnap Defense
Likely targets:
--wealthy or high status
--travelers to politically unstable areas of the world
--particularly corporate executives and overseas employees of those companies described in “Target Analysis”: defense contractors, “wrong” countries or issues.
Awareness is the first step of an individual’s defense plan to avoid being taken captive, especially during the highest risk activity—traveling.
Defensive travel tactics include:
1 Taking direct flights on US carriers
2 Checking in early and going to the secure area and staying clear of lockers, windows, etc, that could become shrapnel in the event of a bombing.
3 Use carriers from neutral countries or those with high security, or both, if can’t use US carrier.
4 Avoid aisle seats and up front, since terrorist skyjackers who roam the aisles would likely grab these passengers.
Common Elements of Terrorism
The Counterterrorism Handbook--Tactics, Procedures and Techniques, by Frank Bolz, Jr., Kenneth J. Dudonis and David P. Schulz.
Ch 1 Outline
Foreword
Terrorism is a form of warfare that relies on fear to deliver its message. Target of the violence goes beyond immediate victim—it’s theatrical. Especially today with 24/7 cable news broadcasting images even before senior officials have had time to assess the situation. Cell phones also have led to “just-in-time decision making.”
Recent terrorist events results in a new countermeasure, new threat, etc. Tactics and weapons are changing to nontraditional, although truck bombs and suicide missions will likely not be given up. Today’s terrorists are more computer savvy and better educated, bringing a new level of sophistication. Computers and the internet are increasingly being used for recruiting, fundraising, planning and making public statements. (Showing videos of decapitations, etc.) Law enforcement officials have trouble keeping up.
Cyber attacks against critical infrastructures may be used as force multipliers to extend the time of an event. Further complicating matters is the fact that private industry owns much (85%?) of the nation’s infrastructure. This necessitates public/private cooperation. Examples: power grids, telecom grids, water/sewer systems, nuclear plants, hydro, transportation hubs, ports, symbolic sites, McDonalds, etc.
Motivation: during Cold War, mostly political. Now, ostensibly carry a religious banner. (Still political/power/ideological/ethnic?). “Only answer to God,” so are especially dangerous. (Partly BS—answer to $$ in many cases like PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah). Politically motivated targets—symbolic value, like soldier, gov’t official, etc. Religious motivated targets—anything goes, including (especially) innocent civilians by any means (killing infidel).
Result: extremely lethal combination of use of technology and indiscriminate targeting. Next step logically would be escalation to weapons of mass destruction. Already had serin gas attack in Tokyo subways in 1995, VX gas mix attempted in Jordan earlier this year by Al Qaeda affiliates. Question is not what the probability of WMD attack is, but whether we can afford to not be prepared.
So far the US’s counterterrorism strategy is not enough. It’s a “Byzantine bureaucracy” that may delay deploying the right tools to the local community in the event of an attack.
“The Counterterrorism Handbook” lays it out for first responders (policeman, fireman, medic, etc). Covers from bombings, hostage-taking, nuclear terrorism and what needs to be done before, during and after an event. To deal effectively with terrorism need an understanding of its characteristics: who is involved, what weapons and tactics are they likely to use. For counterterrorism team: what’s in their tool kits, what does and doesn’t work, what new capabilities need to be developed to face not just today’s but tomorrow’s terrorists. (DHS science unit doing research, private companies doing same).
Acknowledgments
…bomb technicians, investigators, tactical personnel, hostage negotiators, NYPD Bomb Squad, Special Agent, FBI, Rand Institute, Kroll Associates, vice-president news information, Fox News Channel(lol).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1 Common Elements of Terrorism
The Meaning of Terrorism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latin derivation of “terror”: terrere, or “to frighten.” Ex: Reign of terror (during French revolution, of course). Violence is not the key characteristic or an end in itself—it’s a means to instill fear into whole populations. (Ex WWII violent but not “terror.” People also can be frightened w/o it being terrorism—mad cow or ebola virus, avian flue (or was it bioterrorism?).
Since intent is to instill fear, this is the foundation of the counterterrorism response—anything that can be done to reduce fear among the general population is an effective defense. (by being prepared, media, taking it to the terrorists, etc.).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature of Terrorism
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions of terrorism:
Brian Jenkins of the Rand Corporation:
“the use or threatened use of force designed to bring about political change.”
The FBI: “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Per Jenkins, the 3 most serious types of conflict short of nuclear war are: 1. Conventional warfare, 2. Guerilla warfare and 3. International terrorism.
In conventional and guerilla warfare, noncombatants are usually able to distinguish themselves from combatants (and not be targeted for the most part) because the major focus of killing are each other’s armed forces. Examples: high or low-intensity conflicts, such as the over 90 confrontations currently taking place from the former Soviet republics, former European colonies to old ethnic hatreds and narcotics trafficking (So America, Afghanistan, Asia).
In contrast, the exploitation of noncombatants is the essence of international terrorism. The covert nature favors terrorist attacks by small cohort of operatives; who receive $$ and logistical support from radical political and activist organizations, which include governments of rogue nations. Political and other activist groups may act in support of terrorist goals, if not actually fostering and furthering. (ACLU, CAIR, Leftists, Socialists, UN, EU, etc). Either some people or groups are involved or they are being exploited (college liberals, the media, etc).
US DOD sees terrorism in transition and dramatically changed. Reasons:
1 Collapse of the Soviet Union (Al Qaeda finished w/Russians and turned on the US)
2 Changing motivations of terrorists (Gulf I, bases in Saudi Arabia, CIA “declared war” on Al Qaeda, prove US was Paper Tiger, influence elections, get US out of Iraq, want to overthrow their own governments and install Islamist governments, etc).
3 Proliferation in technologies of mass destruction (Khan nuclear black market, VX, serin, anthrax)
4 Increased access to info and information technologies (internet, cell phones, video, Al Jazeera and other terrorist-friendly media)
5 Accelerated centralization of vital components of the national infrastructure, which has increased vulnerability to terrorist attack. (internet, power grids, phone lines, plants, urban cities)
Most terrorism will continue to be:
Directed toward US targets, whether in North America or overseas (majority against business as opposed to government targets—Macs), in urban locations, by those claiming religious, ethnic and (still) political causes.
Terrorism by the Numbers
(Table showing terrorist attacks for ’99 or 00:
135 total, 93 in Western Hemisphere, of which:
86 vs. US business interests, 4 vs. US government and 3 vs. US private interests.
Next highest: Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, Neareast Asia, East Asia and the Pacific, and South Asia last.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PURPOSE OF TERRORISM
Terrorism for political purposes is usually a form of theater, and as such there are almost universal elements:
1 The use of violence to persuade, where bombings or attacks “make a point” with target victims. Target victims aren’t necessarily the injured or killed—it’s the government or public at large that they intend to influence with terror. Typically to change government (s’) policy (ies).
2 Selection of targets and victims for maximum propaganda value. Means choosing targets and victims that will assure the larges media attention. Examples: WTC in ’93, hostage-taking of Israeli athletes in ’72 Olympics, Murrah Fed Bldg in Oklahoma City, US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, Dar es Salaam, WTC in ’01, Pentagon).
3 The use of unprovoked attacks. Actually just about all terrorist acts are unprovoked. They, of course, have all kinds of convoluted justifications.
4 Maximum publicity at minimum risk, especially involving explosive devices—lots of publicity and can use timing devices at a distance (including cell phone detonation). Even suicide missions are minimal risk—aside from the bomber’s death—in that they cannot as easily be caught alive and interrogated, thereby threatening the terrorist organization. Other max publicity are kidnappings or assaults and assassinations, but they involve higher risks. To keep maximum publicity, terrorists will vary the actions. (ex: beheadings in Iraq getting stale and maybe PR backlash, so let some free; then resumed).
5 Use of surprise to circumvent countermeasures, used to attack hardened targets. Even with guards, detection devices and increased perimeter security. Security will ease up eventually (costs money to maintain high-level alert).
6 Threats, harassment and violence used to create fear. Small bombs in public locations—stores, cafes, tourists visiting the Pyramids, borders in West Bank, Syria use snipers). Then can merely threaten the activity to produce fear in the public.
7 Disregarding women and children as victims, and also specifically selecting them as targets. Ensures greater fear, like the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo. (Interesting how the knee-jerk response by Islamists and Arabs are to claim that “women and children” were victims when they are retaliated against. How many phony reports provided by terrorist sympathizers have we seen by the BBC or CNN? Ironic that they feel these typically false claims will garner them sympathy through the media; meanwhile, they themselves target women and children to produce terror in the public without apparently believing the same “victim sympathy” from the media applies. And, of course, they are mostly correct—that liberal, anti-American media. It’s actually cowardly and ignorant, since it might actually produce more anger and cries for retaliation than paralyzing fear. Maybe that’s why the terrorists are losing this war BADLY.)
8 Propaganda is used to maximize the effect of violence, particularly for economic or political goals. Politically, groups want to show they are a viable organization (relevant), a power to be reckoned with, and a force to be feared. Economically, it shows that it is worthy of funding to sympathetic governments and others who may support different terrorist groups. Some may not publicly claim credit, but will leave clues. Others claim falsely. Claims made through Arab-friendly media or the internet.
9 Loyalty to themselves or kindred groups. Examples, Armenians, Croatians, Kurds, Tamils and Basques. Loyalty is so intense—distorted, even—that the more radical elements of an otherwise peaceful movement will commit unspeakable crimes on behalf of that loyalty and associated cause. But 2nd and 3rd-generation terrorists have diminished loyalty to the original cause, sense of pride and a reduced vision of the original goal. Many of them simply do it as a form of gratification and as an end in itself. Thus they become nihilistic and basically in it for the money. Examples: Arafat/PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah and others in war with Israel, all struggling and now fighting each other to deserve the money coming from Iran and Saudi Arabia. Suicide bombers in Iraq supposedly were fetching higher and higher payments as the supply of willing terrorists declined.
Terrorism of the ‘60s and ‘70’s was mostly carried out by college-age individuals and educated political activists (here and in Europe, and are the hippie boomers now in power. Like Joshka Fisher of the Red Brigade). Now many more terrorists are children and uneducated, indoctrinated public—example Palestinian suicide bombers. But Bin Laden’s 19 Al Qaeda bombers from 9-11 were fairly well-educated, middle class 20’s and 30’s. Still, it must be much harder to convince well-educated people to commit suicide than otherwise. In fact, only the highjackers who were actually manning the controls of the plane knew that their mission was suicidal. Bin Laden on tape laughed at how clever he had been by not allowing the others to know their fate. What a real side-splitter.
CHARACTERISTICS OF TERRORISTS
Terrorist group organization: many different ways:
--pyramidal power—leader or small clique at the top and ever-widening tiers of authority moving down the chain of command.
--circles, squares, bull’s-eye target designs.
All have in common—hardcore leadership surrounded by an active cadre; then a broader group of active supporters; then an even broader level of passive support (the “sea” in which terrorists swim).
The “vocal” justification for terrorism “seems to have changed” from politics to religion and ethnicity. (Many examples contradict this—Madrid train bombing, demands from hostage-takers to remove troops from Iraq, Bin Laden’s demand to remove troops from Saudi Arabia; attacking voter registration in Afghanistan, attempts to assassinate Arab leaders and overthrow their US-friendly governments, attacking oil facilities, etc.) Particularly Western democracies have allowed groups to hide behind the shield of accepted religious organizations (CAIR, ACLU, AMA); support groups are free to operate with virtual impunity. In addition to fundraising, religious and ethnic front groups provide cover for covert activities for more militant representatives of terrorist organizations.
Communication and cooperation exist between and among terrorist groups all around the world. Training camps in Cuba, Lebanon, Eastern European countries, pre-liberation Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan (when UBL was holed up there).
COUONTERTERRORIST RESPONSE
The US has dramatically enhanced its counterterrorist response capability over the last decade. The President sets the overall policy for counterterrorism, with the assistance of the National Security Council (NSC). Presidential Directive 39, entitled US Policy on Counterterrorism—spells out the need to protect US citizens, arrest terrorists, respond to sponsors of terrorism, and provide assistance to the victims. It’s too complex for a single agency. So effort divided into 2 broad phases: the crisis, or pre-incident phase and the consequence, or post-incident phase.
In response to the US embassies in East Africa being bombed, Congress established the Gilmore Commission. (Advisory Panel to Access Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction). Included WMD and suggested the US military assume the lead role in dealing with WMD.
Major points of US counterterrorism policy include:
• Make no concessions to terrorists and strike no deals.
• Bring terrorists to justice for their crimes.
• Isolate and apply pressure on states that sponsor terrorism to force them to change their behavior.
• Bolster the counterterrorism capabilities of those countries that work with the US and that require assistance.
Agencies:
--Secret Service—protecting government officials, like the President, VP and their families, presidential candidates, P and VP –elects and selected other senior government officials.
--Secret Service and Dept of State share responsibility for protecting heads of foreign states and other international dignitaries visiting the US. They also coordinate with local law enforcement, especially in crowd and traffic control, building security and uniformed police presences.
The response to a terrorist action is addressed on three levels:
1 LOCAL: First responders are typically local public safety and medical personnel.
2 STATE: If local authorities require help (unless it’s a large municipality like NY), assistance can be requested through a state Office of Emergency Services. National Guard and other state resources can also be dispatched.
3 FEDERAL: Crisis management involving domestic acts of terrorism—FBI is the lead agency. Role includes active measures for prevention, immediate incident and post-incident response. FBI also utilizes local and state law enforcement officials.
--Consequence management for both preparedness and dealing with terrorist incidents—Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the lead agency.
--Rescue and medical functions during terrorist incidents—state and local governments are controlling agencies.
--If WMDs are used, active military units may be called up (National Guard?) if local capabilities are overwhelmed.
--Internationally increasing assistance to friendly nations for their use in combating terrorism—US State Department. Includes financial, training and intelligence sharing.
--International intelligence gathering and interaction with government and non-government agencies and organizations—CIA.
COUNTERTERRORIST OPERATIONS
Counterterrorism operations usually involve a blend of law enforcement agencies and the nation’s military resources, particularly when terrorism strikes overseas. The NSC oversees the effort involving domestic terrorism. The Counterterrorism Security Group includes State, Justice (through the FBI), Treasury, Transportation (primarily FAA and TSA), Energy, the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
In all domestic terrorist actions and in many of those against US government facilities abroad, the FBI is lead agency in crisis and post-incident investigations. (Examples are US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania).
The threat of WMDs has persuaded the federal government to be more aggressive. The Defense Authorization Act, aka the Nunn Luger Domenici Act, enhanced defense against biological and chemical weapons. The Act authorized the DOD to provide initial training for first responders in major urban centers.
Counterterrorism is not just for US, but western European countries and industrialized states elsewhere. Military plays major role—ie, Delta Force in US, SAS in UK, GIGN in France and GSG-9 in Germany.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Nuclear attacks are not only worry from serious terrorist attacks—now we must consider biological and chemical weapons from rogue nations who arm their own operatives or supply to terrorist groups elsewhere. Recent examples are the Aum Shin Rikio (sp?) sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo subway system and the gas attack which was foiled in Jordan (VX combination gas that aimed to kill up to 20,000 people).
The FBI operates the National Domestic Preparedness Office, which acts as a clearing house on WMD. The NDPO facilitates and coordinates in emergency response community with detection, protection, analysis and decontamination. If nuclear terrorism is suspected or used, the US Energy Department becomes involved. Low-intensity conflicts have raised the likelihood of first-strike or retaliatory responses to terrorism. Examples—Kashmir by India or Pakistan.
ROLE OF THE MILITARY
DOD has been assigned a much greater role than previously in dealing with terrorist attacks, both domestically and abroad. DOD supports local, state and federal agencies in planning and response to emergencies, especially those involving WMDs.
Military plays more a role overseas than domestically (Posse comitatus). But Gilmore Commission (National Commission on Terrorism) proposed an increased role. Units include the explosive ordinance teams, the Army’s Technical Escort Unit, and the Marine Corps’s Chemical Biological Incident Response Force that plan and establish procedures for expanded counterterrorist operations.
But use of the military in counterterrorism is still controversial, such as at Waco. US Army personnel were present as observers and maybe advisors. Any more would have violated federal laws.
ROLE OF THE FAA
The FAA is the lead agency in dealing with the hijacking of airplanes and in airport security, even though the FBI most likely coordinates the operation. There is an understanding where the FBI has primary responsibility in a skyjacking attempt with the doors of the aircraft are open. If the doors of the aircraft are closed, the FAA assumes responsibility. In practice, though, the FAA will likely defer to the FBI and its full law enforcement capabilities.
In addition to airplane hijacking, the FAA also monitors airport security involving both local police and private security companies under contract (DHS and TSA also involved).
FINANCIAL TERRORISM
Money laundering can lead to financial terrorism. Many well-known financial institutions have had officers involved—Arab banks, European banks and off-shore banks. Done to legitimize ill-gotten funds of illegal businesses or criminals. Iran and Iraq have been accused of counterfeiting US currency. It creates money for them as well as possibly destabilizing our currency.
COUNTERTERRORIST CAPABILITIES
The original FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) worked out of Quantico, VA, home of the National Academy. The team responds anywhere in the country and abroad at the request of the President. It is highly trained in weapons, tactics and crisis management. The tactical arm has carried out rescues (including parachuting in, shaping a directional explosive charge); the negotiating part has enjoyed success in several hostage incidents, including in federal prisons.
The HRT was involved in Waco, Texas, in ’93. ATF agents were killed, so the FBI became involved. In the aftermath of the resulting poorly executed attempt to serve search warrants that included miscommunications between the tactical and negotiating teams, the HRT, its policies and procedures were severely criticized. The tactical team engaged in psychological activity that was at odds with the efforts of negotiators.
The FBI revamped and renamed the HRT to the Crisis Intervention Response Group (CIRG) to focus more on negotiation and cooperation.
The CIRG will have a long lead time before it can respond. Notification and request must be made through FBI channels. Current lead time is about 6 hours (the team can be en route 2 hours after a formal request has been granted). Many local FBI file offices in major cities also have special weapons and tactics (SWAT)-trained agents and some trained negotiators who can respond more quickly.
COUNTERTERRORIST TACTICS
In combating terrorism, there are four major components that are used in addressing the threat: intelligence, antiterrorism, counterterrorism and consequence management (?)(Or intelligence research and analysis).
1 INTELLIGENCE. Intelligence gathering includes the collection, analysis and dissemination of information to relevant parties. Intelligence can be collected in old-fashioned legwork; sophisticated electronic voice and data capture; and the use of human operatives. Operatives were severely restricted in 1995 (nobody with criminal records could qualify for terrorist informants?).
The gathering of information comes up against privacy and other civil liberty concerns, particularly in protecting innocent parties (but extending to the ACLU and CAIR attempting to protect whole races, including Arab and/or Muslim terrorists). But domestically, the FBI activity is subject to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows agents to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches of non-citizens, including individuals suspected of engaging in international terrorism. The Patriot Act provides similar abilities, including delayed-warrant searches. The US Supreme Court has ruled on the Patriot Act (?) and upheld the majority of it.
2 ANTITERRORISM. Involves programs aimed at deterring potential activity by addressing security awareness, enhancing physical security and actively pursuing individuals responsible for terrorism.
Specifically—measures to protect, or “harden,” potential targets; cooperation between private and government agencies; most law enforcement organizations have antiterrorism programs keyed to specific potential targets or individuals within its jurisdiction.
3 COUNTERTERRORISM. Including units dealing with hostage, bombing and kidnapping cases. The military has the Delta Force, based at Fort Bragg, NC. Local law enforcement personnel are first on the scene with federal responder teams at least a couple of hours away. So recently there has been heavy emphasis on training first responders. Most police departments have SWAT teams and explosives disposal personnel.
4 INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS (OR CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT). Generally in large cities, state, federal agencies, and the FBI, CIA and various military units. Information is analyzed, compiled into reports and disseminated to agencies. Used for investigators tracking terrorist operatives and by private security professionals in planning protection for facilities and personnel.
Sources for private security professionals, including the American Society for Industrial Security, Jane’s Information Service and others.
INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUES
From its establishment in the 1920’s until the late 1970’s, the FBI maintained a distant relationship with local law enforcement agencies. It worked together rarely or when legislation required it, as with kidnappings or interstate commerce. In the late 70’s, the FBI began establishing Joint Bank Robbery Task Forces in larger cities. This combined the technical capabilities and nationwide resources of the FBI with the street smarts of local police and detectives. Federal money also helped the joint task forces succeed. Federal courts tried the arrestees under federal statutes. Violations are easier to prove than in the states, and federal courts typically handed out tougher sentences.
The success of the bank robbery task forces led to other joint efforts, including the NYPD/FBI Joint Terrorist Task Force in NYCity. This unit is on the cutting edge of domestic terrorist activity. Since the FBI is the lead agency in domestic terrorism, NYCity police officers are sworn US deputy marshals. This allows them jurisdiction across the country.
Example of joint federal/local law enforcement in counterterrorism: the FBI has trained specialists who respond to bomb scenes to organize and direct collection of physical evidence. The FBI is usually deferred to for the investigative stage even when the State Department is the lead agency abroad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES
In hostage or barricaded situations, the basic operational procedures for the early stages of terrorist activities are based on the local police department’s guidelines.
In bombing incidents, local police will deal with it and the consequence investigation (unless intelligence provides foreknowledge). Still, good cooperation between local police and private sector and vice versa helps to harden targets.
Events like Columbine exemplify the need for cooperative training between police agencies, even though it wasn’t necessarily a “terrorist” act. Determinate factors are how the first responding officer/s establish contact, seal off the affected area, conduct an evacuation and/or protect the crime scene.
INTERAGENCY LIAISON
Involves cooperation from:
--Local departments in contiguous jurisdictions.
--Local or state-and-local relationships with the FBI
--between the FBI and federal agencies like the Secret Service, DEA, ATF, Immigration and Naturalization, Customs, et al.
Liaison implies contact prior to an incident, as in mutual response agreements with adjacent jurisdictions by smaller police agencies, as well as with state and federal agencies. Importance cannot be overstated. Contacts can range from formal training sessions to conferences, workshops, joint practice emergency drills and informal networking.
LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE
Intelligence-gathering can have local significance, like the names of people, location of places and lists of dates which have particular significance locally. Examples are anniversaries of certain dates, like early December commemoration of WTO disruption by anti-Capitalist hippies; April 19 event at Waco and bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City two years later. Dates of whale migrations matter for radical environmentalists. Dates of uprisings and revolutions “in the old country” may matter to related ethnic or national groups in a community. November 6 marks the date of the birth of Mohammed, while November 10 is the birthday of the US Marine Corps.
PRIVATE SECTOR COOPERATION
Cooperation between private industry and law enforcement greatly helps to harden a potential terrorist target. Contacts by the private sector should also extend to emergency service agencies as well as state and federal agencies. Private forces may be larger than local force. Many railroads are privately owned but have sworn officers with multi-state commissions. Private sector often supports and sponsors training programs , as in allowing facilities to be used in practice drills, purchasing specialized equipment, including when no public funds are available.
Local police specialists can also advise about private security guidelines and training for various emergency situations, so that the private security personnel can properly set the stage should such an incident occur.
Ch 1 Outline
Foreword
Terrorism is a form of warfare that relies on fear to deliver its message. Target of the violence goes beyond immediate victim—it’s theatrical. Especially today with 24/7 cable news broadcasting images even before senior officials have had time to assess the situation. Cell phones also have led to “just-in-time decision making.”
Recent terrorist events results in a new countermeasure, new threat, etc. Tactics and weapons are changing to nontraditional, although truck bombs and suicide missions will likely not be given up. Today’s terrorists are more computer savvy and better educated, bringing a new level of sophistication. Computers and the internet are increasingly being used for recruiting, fundraising, planning and making public statements. (Showing videos of decapitations, etc.) Law enforcement officials have trouble keeping up.
Cyber attacks against critical infrastructures may be used as force multipliers to extend the time of an event. Further complicating matters is the fact that private industry owns much (85%?) of the nation’s infrastructure. This necessitates public/private cooperation. Examples: power grids, telecom grids, water/sewer systems, nuclear plants, hydro, transportation hubs, ports, symbolic sites, McDonalds, etc.
Motivation: during Cold War, mostly political. Now, ostensibly carry a religious banner. (Still political/power/ideological/ethnic?). “Only answer to God,” so are especially dangerous. (Partly BS—answer to $$ in many cases like PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah). Politically motivated targets—symbolic value, like soldier, gov’t official, etc. Religious motivated targets—anything goes, including (especially) innocent civilians by any means (killing infidel).
Result: extremely lethal combination of use of technology and indiscriminate targeting. Next step logically would be escalation to weapons of mass destruction. Already had serin gas attack in Tokyo subways in 1995, VX gas mix attempted in Jordan earlier this year by Al Qaeda affiliates. Question is not what the probability of WMD attack is, but whether we can afford to not be prepared.
So far the US’s counterterrorism strategy is not enough. It’s a “Byzantine bureaucracy” that may delay deploying the right tools to the local community in the event of an attack.
“The Counterterrorism Handbook” lays it out for first responders (policeman, fireman, medic, etc). Covers from bombings, hostage-taking, nuclear terrorism and what needs to be done before, during and after an event. To deal effectively with terrorism need an understanding of its characteristics: who is involved, what weapons and tactics are they likely to use. For counterterrorism team: what’s in their tool kits, what does and doesn’t work, what new capabilities need to be developed to face not just today’s but tomorrow’s terrorists. (DHS science unit doing research, private companies doing same).
Acknowledgments
…bomb technicians, investigators, tactical personnel, hostage negotiators, NYPD Bomb Squad, Special Agent, FBI, Rand Institute, Kroll Associates, vice-president news information, Fox News Channel(lol).
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Chapter 1 Common Elements of Terrorism
The Meaning of Terrorism
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Latin derivation of “terror”: terrere, or “to frighten.” Ex: Reign of terror (during French revolution, of course). Violence is not the key characteristic or an end in itself—it’s a means to instill fear into whole populations. (Ex WWII violent but not “terror.” People also can be frightened w/o it being terrorism—mad cow or ebola virus, avian flue (or was it bioterrorism?).
Since intent is to instill fear, this is the foundation of the counterterrorism response—anything that can be done to reduce fear among the general population is an effective defense. (by being prepared, media, taking it to the terrorists, etc.).
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nature of Terrorism
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Definitions of terrorism:
Brian Jenkins of the Rand Corporation:
“the use or threatened use of force designed to bring about political change.”
The FBI: “the unlawful use of force or violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives.”
Per Jenkins, the 3 most serious types of conflict short of nuclear war are: 1. Conventional warfare, 2. Guerilla warfare and 3. International terrorism.
In conventional and guerilla warfare, noncombatants are usually able to distinguish themselves from combatants (and not be targeted for the most part) because the major focus of killing are each other’s armed forces. Examples: high or low-intensity conflicts, such as the over 90 confrontations currently taking place from the former Soviet republics, former European colonies to old ethnic hatreds and narcotics trafficking (So America, Afghanistan, Asia).
In contrast, the exploitation of noncombatants is the essence of international terrorism. The covert nature favors terrorist attacks by small cohort of operatives; who receive $$ and logistical support from radical political and activist organizations, which include governments of rogue nations. Political and other activist groups may act in support of terrorist goals, if not actually fostering and furthering. (ACLU, CAIR, Leftists, Socialists, UN, EU, etc). Either some people or groups are involved or they are being exploited (college liberals, the media, etc).
US DOD sees terrorism in transition and dramatically changed. Reasons:
1 Collapse of the Soviet Union (Al Qaeda finished w/Russians and turned on the US)
2 Changing motivations of terrorists (Gulf I, bases in Saudi Arabia, CIA “declared war” on Al Qaeda, prove US was Paper Tiger, influence elections, get US out of Iraq, want to overthrow their own governments and install Islamist governments, etc).
3 Proliferation in technologies of mass destruction (Khan nuclear black market, VX, serin, anthrax)
4 Increased access to info and information technologies (internet, cell phones, video, Al Jazeera and other terrorist-friendly media)
5 Accelerated centralization of vital components of the national infrastructure, which has increased vulnerability to terrorist attack. (internet, power grids, phone lines, plants, urban cities)
Most terrorism will continue to be:
Directed toward US targets, whether in North America or overseas (majority against business as opposed to government targets—Macs), in urban locations, by those claiming religious, ethnic and (still) political causes.
Terrorism by the Numbers
(Table showing terrorist attacks for ’99 or 00:
135 total, 93 in Western Hemisphere, of which:
86 vs. US business interests, 4 vs. US government and 3 vs. US private interests.
Next highest: Europe, Sub-Saharan Africa, Neareast Asia, East Asia and the Pacific, and South Asia last.)
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
PURPOSE OF TERRORISM
Terrorism for political purposes is usually a form of theater, and as such there are almost universal elements:
1 The use of violence to persuade, where bombings or attacks “make a point” with target victims. Target victims aren’t necessarily the injured or killed—it’s the government or public at large that they intend to influence with terror. Typically to change government (s’) policy (ies).
2 Selection of targets and victims for maximum propaganda value. Means choosing targets and victims that will assure the larges media attention. Examples: WTC in ’93, hostage-taking of Israeli athletes in ’72 Olympics, Murrah Fed Bldg in Oklahoma City, US embassies in Nairobi, Kenya, Dar es Salaam, WTC in ’01, Pentagon).
3 The use of unprovoked attacks. Actually just about all terrorist acts are unprovoked. They, of course, have all kinds of convoluted justifications.
4 Maximum publicity at minimum risk, especially involving explosive devices—lots of publicity and can use timing devices at a distance (including cell phone detonation). Even suicide missions are minimal risk—aside from the bomber’s death—in that they cannot as easily be caught alive and interrogated, thereby threatening the terrorist organization. Other max publicity are kidnappings or assaults and assassinations, but they involve higher risks. To keep maximum publicity, terrorists will vary the actions. (ex: beheadings in Iraq getting stale and maybe PR backlash, so let some free; then resumed).
5 Use of surprise to circumvent countermeasures, used to attack hardened targets. Even with guards, detection devices and increased perimeter security. Security will ease up eventually (costs money to maintain high-level alert).
6 Threats, harassment and violence used to create fear. Small bombs in public locations—stores, cafes, tourists visiting the Pyramids, borders in West Bank, Syria use snipers). Then can merely threaten the activity to produce fear in the public.
7 Disregarding women and children as victims, and also specifically selecting them as targets. Ensures greater fear, like the ethnic cleansing in Bosnia and Kosovo. (Interesting how the knee-jerk response by Islamists and Arabs are to claim that “women and children” were victims when they are retaliated against. How many phony reports provided by terrorist sympathizers have we seen by the BBC or CNN? Ironic that they feel these typically false claims will garner them sympathy through the media; meanwhile, they themselves target women and children to produce terror in the public without apparently believing the same “victim sympathy” from the media applies. And, of course, they are mostly correct—that liberal, anti-American media. It’s actually cowardly and ignorant, since it might actually produce more anger and cries for retaliation than paralyzing fear. Maybe that’s why the terrorists are losing this war BADLY.)
8 Propaganda is used to maximize the effect of violence, particularly for economic or political goals. Politically, groups want to show they are a viable organization (relevant), a power to be reckoned with, and a force to be feared. Economically, it shows that it is worthy of funding to sympathetic governments and others who may support different terrorist groups. Some may not publicly claim credit, but will leave clues. Others claim falsely. Claims made through Arab-friendly media or the internet.
9 Loyalty to themselves or kindred groups. Examples, Armenians, Croatians, Kurds, Tamils and Basques. Loyalty is so intense—distorted, even—that the more radical elements of an otherwise peaceful movement will commit unspeakable crimes on behalf of that loyalty and associated cause. But 2nd and 3rd-generation terrorists have diminished loyalty to the original cause, sense of pride and a reduced vision of the original goal. Many of them simply do it as a form of gratification and as an end in itself. Thus they become nihilistic and basically in it for the money. Examples: Arafat/PLO, Hamas, Hezbollah and others in war with Israel, all struggling and now fighting each other to deserve the money coming from Iran and Saudi Arabia. Suicide bombers in Iraq supposedly were fetching higher and higher payments as the supply of willing terrorists declined.
Terrorism of the ‘60s and ‘70’s was mostly carried out by college-age individuals and educated political activists (here and in Europe, and are the hippie boomers now in power. Like Joshka Fisher of the Red Brigade). Now many more terrorists are children and uneducated, indoctrinated public—example Palestinian suicide bombers. But Bin Laden’s 19 Al Qaeda bombers from 9-11 were fairly well-educated, middle class 20’s and 30’s. Still, it must be much harder to convince well-educated people to commit suicide than otherwise. In fact, only the highjackers who were actually manning the controls of the plane knew that their mission was suicidal. Bin Laden on tape laughed at how clever he had been by not allowing the others to know their fate. What a real side-splitter.
CHARACTERISTICS OF TERRORISTS
Terrorist group organization: many different ways:
--pyramidal power—leader or small clique at the top and ever-widening tiers of authority moving down the chain of command.
--circles, squares, bull’s-eye target designs.
All have in common—hardcore leadership surrounded by an active cadre; then a broader group of active supporters; then an even broader level of passive support (the “sea” in which terrorists swim).
The “vocal” justification for terrorism “seems to have changed” from politics to religion and ethnicity. (Many examples contradict this—Madrid train bombing, demands from hostage-takers to remove troops from Iraq, Bin Laden’s demand to remove troops from Saudi Arabia; attacking voter registration in Afghanistan, attempts to assassinate Arab leaders and overthrow their US-friendly governments, attacking oil facilities, etc.) Particularly Western democracies have allowed groups to hide behind the shield of accepted religious organizations (CAIR, ACLU, AMA); support groups are free to operate with virtual impunity. In addition to fundraising, religious and ethnic front groups provide cover for covert activities for more militant representatives of terrorist organizations.
Communication and cooperation exist between and among terrorist groups all around the world. Training camps in Cuba, Lebanon, Eastern European countries, pre-liberation Afghanistan, Yemen, Sudan (when UBL was holed up there).
COUONTERTERRORIST RESPONSE
The US has dramatically enhanced its counterterrorist response capability over the last decade. The President sets the overall policy for counterterrorism, with the assistance of the National Security Council (NSC). Presidential Directive 39, entitled US Policy on Counterterrorism—spells out the need to protect US citizens, arrest terrorists, respond to sponsors of terrorism, and provide assistance to the victims. It’s too complex for a single agency. So effort divided into 2 broad phases: the crisis, or pre-incident phase and the consequence, or post-incident phase.
In response to the US embassies in East Africa being bombed, Congress established the Gilmore Commission. (Advisory Panel to Access Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction). Included WMD and suggested the US military assume the lead role in dealing with WMD.
Major points of US counterterrorism policy include:
• Make no concessions to terrorists and strike no deals.
• Bring terrorists to justice for their crimes.
• Isolate and apply pressure on states that sponsor terrorism to force them to change their behavior.
• Bolster the counterterrorism capabilities of those countries that work with the US and that require assistance.
Agencies:
--Secret Service—protecting government officials, like the President, VP and their families, presidential candidates, P and VP –elects and selected other senior government officials.
--Secret Service and Dept of State share responsibility for protecting heads of foreign states and other international dignitaries visiting the US. They also coordinate with local law enforcement, especially in crowd and traffic control, building security and uniformed police presences.
The response to a terrorist action is addressed on three levels:
1 LOCAL: First responders are typically local public safety and medical personnel.
2 STATE: If local authorities require help (unless it’s a large municipality like NY), assistance can be requested through a state Office of Emergency Services. National Guard and other state resources can also be dispatched.
3 FEDERAL: Crisis management involving domestic acts of terrorism—FBI is the lead agency. Role includes active measures for prevention, immediate incident and post-incident response. FBI also utilizes local and state law enforcement officials.
--Consequence management for both preparedness and dealing with terrorist incidents—Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is the lead agency.
--Rescue and medical functions during terrorist incidents—state and local governments are controlling agencies.
--If WMDs are used, active military units may be called up (National Guard?) if local capabilities are overwhelmed.
--Internationally increasing assistance to friendly nations for their use in combating terrorism—US State Department. Includes financial, training and intelligence sharing.
--International intelligence gathering and interaction with government and non-government agencies and organizations—CIA.
COUNTERTERRORIST OPERATIONS
Counterterrorism operations usually involve a blend of law enforcement agencies and the nation’s military resources, particularly when terrorism strikes overseas. The NSC oversees the effort involving domestic terrorism. The Counterterrorism Security Group includes State, Justice (through the FBI), Treasury, Transportation (primarily FAA and TSA), Energy, the CIA and the Joint Chiefs of Staff.
In all domestic terrorist actions and in many of those against US government facilities abroad, the FBI is lead agency in crisis and post-incident investigations. (Examples are US embassies in Kenya and Tanzania).
The threat of WMDs has persuaded the federal government to be more aggressive. The Defense Authorization Act, aka the Nunn Luger Domenici Act, enhanced defense against biological and chemical weapons. The Act authorized the DOD to provide initial training for first responders in major urban centers.
Counterterrorism is not just for US, but western European countries and industrialized states elsewhere. Military plays major role—ie, Delta Force in US, SAS in UK, GIGN in France and GSG-9 in Germany.
WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION
Nuclear attacks are not only worry from serious terrorist attacks—now we must consider biological and chemical weapons from rogue nations who arm their own operatives or supply to terrorist groups elsewhere. Recent examples are the Aum Shin Rikio (sp?) sarin gas attacks in the Tokyo subway system and the gas attack which was foiled in Jordan (VX combination gas that aimed to kill up to 20,000 people).
The FBI operates the National Domestic Preparedness Office, which acts as a clearing house on WMD. The NDPO facilitates and coordinates in emergency response community with detection, protection, analysis and decontamination. If nuclear terrorism is suspected or used, the US Energy Department becomes involved. Low-intensity conflicts have raised the likelihood of first-strike or retaliatory responses to terrorism. Examples—Kashmir by India or Pakistan.
ROLE OF THE MILITARY
DOD has been assigned a much greater role than previously in dealing with terrorist attacks, both domestically and abroad. DOD supports local, state and federal agencies in planning and response to emergencies, especially those involving WMDs.
Military plays more a role overseas than domestically (Posse comitatus). But Gilmore Commission (National Commission on Terrorism) proposed an increased role. Units include the explosive ordinance teams, the Army’s Technical Escort Unit, and the Marine Corps’s Chemical Biological Incident Response Force that plan and establish procedures for expanded counterterrorist operations.
But use of the military in counterterrorism is still controversial, such as at Waco. US Army personnel were present as observers and maybe advisors. Any more would have violated federal laws.
ROLE OF THE FAA
The FAA is the lead agency in dealing with the hijacking of airplanes and in airport security, even though the FBI most likely coordinates the operation. There is an understanding where the FBI has primary responsibility in a skyjacking attempt with the doors of the aircraft are open. If the doors of the aircraft are closed, the FAA assumes responsibility. In practice, though, the FAA will likely defer to the FBI and its full law enforcement capabilities.
In addition to airplane hijacking, the FAA also monitors airport security involving both local police and private security companies under contract (DHS and TSA also involved).
FINANCIAL TERRORISM
Money laundering can lead to financial terrorism. Many well-known financial institutions have had officers involved—Arab banks, European banks and off-shore banks. Done to legitimize ill-gotten funds of illegal businesses or criminals. Iran and Iraq have been accused of counterfeiting US currency. It creates money for them as well as possibly destabilizing our currency.
COUNTERTERRORIST CAPABILITIES
The original FBI Hostage Rescue Team (HRT) worked out of Quantico, VA, home of the National Academy. The team responds anywhere in the country and abroad at the request of the President. It is highly trained in weapons, tactics and crisis management. The tactical arm has carried out rescues (including parachuting in, shaping a directional explosive charge); the negotiating part has enjoyed success in several hostage incidents, including in federal prisons.
The HRT was involved in Waco, Texas, in ’93. ATF agents were killed, so the FBI became involved. In the aftermath of the resulting poorly executed attempt to serve search warrants that included miscommunications between the tactical and negotiating teams, the HRT, its policies and procedures were severely criticized. The tactical team engaged in psychological activity that was at odds with the efforts of negotiators.
The FBI revamped and renamed the HRT to the Crisis Intervention Response Group (CIRG) to focus more on negotiation and cooperation.
The CIRG will have a long lead time before it can respond. Notification and request must be made through FBI channels. Current lead time is about 6 hours (the team can be en route 2 hours after a formal request has been granted). Many local FBI file offices in major cities also have special weapons and tactics (SWAT)-trained agents and some trained negotiators who can respond more quickly.
COUNTERTERRORIST TACTICS
In combating terrorism, there are four major components that are used in addressing the threat: intelligence, antiterrorism, counterterrorism and consequence management (?)(Or intelligence research and analysis).
1 INTELLIGENCE. Intelligence gathering includes the collection, analysis and dissemination of information to relevant parties. Intelligence can be collected in old-fashioned legwork; sophisticated electronic voice and data capture; and the use of human operatives. Operatives were severely restricted in 1995 (nobody with criminal records could qualify for terrorist informants?).
The gathering of information comes up against privacy and other civil liberty concerns, particularly in protecting innocent parties (but extending to the ACLU and CAIR attempting to protect whole races, including Arab and/or Muslim terrorists). But domestically, the FBI activity is subject to the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act, which allows agents to conduct electronic surveillance and physical searches of non-citizens, including individuals suspected of engaging in international terrorism. The Patriot Act provides similar abilities, including delayed-warrant searches. The US Supreme Court has ruled on the Patriot Act (?) and upheld the majority of it.
2 ANTITERRORISM. Involves programs aimed at deterring potential activity by addressing security awareness, enhancing physical security and actively pursuing individuals responsible for terrorism.
Specifically—measures to protect, or “harden,” potential targets; cooperation between private and government agencies; most law enforcement organizations have antiterrorism programs keyed to specific potential targets or individuals within its jurisdiction.
3 COUNTERTERRORISM. Including units dealing with hostage, bombing and kidnapping cases. The military has the Delta Force, based at Fort Bragg, NC. Local law enforcement personnel are first on the scene with federal responder teams at least a couple of hours away. So recently there has been heavy emphasis on training first responders. Most police departments have SWAT teams and explosives disposal personnel.
4 INTELLIGENCE RESEARCH AND ANALYSIS (OR CONSEQUENCE MANAGEMENT). Generally in large cities, state, federal agencies, and the FBI, CIA and various military units. Information is analyzed, compiled into reports and disseminated to agencies. Used for investigators tracking terrorist operatives and by private security professionals in planning protection for facilities and personnel.
Sources for private security professionals, including the American Society for Industrial Security, Jane’s Information Service and others.
INVESTIGATIVE TECHNIQUES
From its establishment in the 1920’s until the late 1970’s, the FBI maintained a distant relationship with local law enforcement agencies. It worked together rarely or when legislation required it, as with kidnappings or interstate commerce. In the late 70’s, the FBI began establishing Joint Bank Robbery Task Forces in larger cities. This combined the technical capabilities and nationwide resources of the FBI with the street smarts of local police and detectives. Federal money also helped the joint task forces succeed. Federal courts tried the arrestees under federal statutes. Violations are easier to prove than in the states, and federal courts typically handed out tougher sentences.
The success of the bank robbery task forces led to other joint efforts, including the NYPD/FBI Joint Terrorist Task Force in NYCity. This unit is on the cutting edge of domestic terrorist activity. Since the FBI is the lead agency in domestic terrorism, NYCity police officers are sworn US deputy marshals. This allows them jurisdiction across the country.
Example of joint federal/local law enforcement in counterterrorism: the FBI has trained specialists who respond to bomb scenes to organize and direct collection of physical evidence. The FBI is usually deferred to for the investigative stage even when the State Department is the lead agency abroad.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------LOCAL LAW ENFORCEMENT CAPABILITIES
In hostage or barricaded situations, the basic operational procedures for the early stages of terrorist activities are based on the local police department’s guidelines.
In bombing incidents, local police will deal with it and the consequence investigation (unless intelligence provides foreknowledge). Still, good cooperation between local police and private sector and vice versa helps to harden targets.
Events like Columbine exemplify the need for cooperative training between police agencies, even though it wasn’t necessarily a “terrorist” act. Determinate factors are how the first responding officer/s establish contact, seal off the affected area, conduct an evacuation and/or protect the crime scene.
INTERAGENCY LIAISON
Involves cooperation from:
--Local departments in contiguous jurisdictions.
--Local or state-and-local relationships with the FBI
--between the FBI and federal agencies like the Secret Service, DEA, ATF, Immigration and Naturalization, Customs, et al.
Liaison implies contact prior to an incident, as in mutual response agreements with adjacent jurisdictions by smaller police agencies, as well as with state and federal agencies. Importance cannot be overstated. Contacts can range from formal training sessions to conferences, workshops, joint practice emergency drills and informal networking.
LOCAL SIGNIFICANCE
Intelligence-gathering can have local significance, like the names of people, location of places and lists of dates which have particular significance locally. Examples are anniversaries of certain dates, like early December commemoration of WTO disruption by anti-Capitalist hippies; April 19 event at Waco and bombing of the Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City two years later. Dates of whale migrations matter for radical environmentalists. Dates of uprisings and revolutions “in the old country” may matter to related ethnic or national groups in a community. November 6 marks the date of the birth of Mohammed, while November 10 is the birthday of the US Marine Corps.
PRIVATE SECTOR COOPERATION
Cooperation between private industry and law enforcement greatly helps to harden a potential terrorist target. Contacts by the private sector should also extend to emergency service agencies as well as state and federal agencies. Private forces may be larger than local force. Many railroads are privately owned but have sworn officers with multi-state commissions. Private sector often supports and sponsors training programs , as in allowing facilities to be used in practice drills, purchasing specialized equipment, including when no public funds are available.
Local police specialists can also advise about private security guidelines and training for various emergency situations, so that the private security personnel can properly set the stage should such an incident occur.
Saturday, August 21, 2004
Having trouble picking a side on the WOT?
The ACLU seems intent on fighting the war on terrorism for...Terrorists' "Right" to Work:"
The ACLU has an apparently simple choice: take the $500,000 and use the lists to identify terrorist-related names or refuse the federal money and look the other way. With the media finally shining some light on the ACLU's equivocating, maybe they will feel some pressure to demonstrate that there is a limit to their duplicity.
Relatedly, Michelle Malkin has a piece on how the FBI has taken steps to prevent terrorism and acts of violence by questioning various individuals. The usual culprits cry foul. In Malkin's words, "You just can't win with these whiners." No wonder the Left dislikes her.
But the groups in question seem to have atypical ideas of how their slogans of "peaceful" and "protest" actually translate into action:
If that's their version of "peaceful protest," then their apparent world-view would make sense. And interestingly it aligns pretty closely with that of terrorists both domestically and abroad.
I'm with the FBI and the bomb-sniffing dogs on this one.
The group's latest batch of press releases insists that the organization will never check their new hires against terrorism watch lists.
The problem for the ACLU is that they actually already signed an agreement to use the watch lists in order to obtain nearly $500,000 from the Combined Federal Campaign, as required by the USA PATRIOT Act. The CFC is an agency which dispenses charitable donations from federal and state employees to more than 2,000 non-profit groups, which totals some $250 million per year.
The ACLU, however, despite all its bluster about the Constitution, apparently has little use for contract law. They decided to simply disregard the list. And they probably would have gotten away with it if they could have kept their egos in check. That, of course, proved quite impossible and soon ACLU Executive Director Anthony Romero was announcing to the world on NPR that while he'd printed out the watch lists, he'd "never consulted them." Furthermore, he had no intention of doing so.
The ACLU has an apparently simple choice: take the $500,000 and use the lists to identify terrorist-related names or refuse the federal money and look the other way. With the media finally shining some light on the ACLU's equivocating, maybe they will feel some pressure to demonstrate that there is a limit to their duplicity.
Relatedly, Michelle Malkin has a piece on how the FBI has taken steps to prevent terrorism and acts of violence by questioning various individuals. The usual culprits cry foul. In Malkin's words, "You just can't win with these whiners." No wonder the Left dislikes her.
But the groups in question seem to have atypical ideas of how their slogans of "peaceful" and "protest" actually translate into action:
The fact is that many anti-war groups have been tied to extremist guerrilla tactics and pro-violence movements. The Ruckus Society caused massive rioting and destruction in Seattle in 1999. In a militant call to arms published last spring across left-wing Internet sites, infamous environmental thug Craig Rosebraugh called on his antiwar colleagues to take "direct actions" against American military establishments, urban centers, corporations, government buildings and media outlets. In Oakland, "peaceful" protesters exercised their "free speech" by attempting to shut down a port involved in shipping military supplies to soldiers during wartime.
The "Black Bloc" organization is instructing protestors to trick bomb-sniffing dogs on New Jersey Transit lines and New York City subways in an effort to create "maximum disruption" and drain police resources.
If that's their version of "peaceful protest," then their apparent world-view would make sense. And interestingly it aligns pretty closely with that of terrorists both domestically and abroad.
I'm with the FBI and the bomb-sniffing dogs on this one.
Big Media and Kerry vs Swiftvets
Via Instapundit:
Thanks for the reference, Glenn. And no, Lehrer chose not to mention Cambodia.
ANOTHER UPDATE: And here's an example, in the "budget" from the New York Times, advising affiliate papers of what's coming:
ANTI-KERRY-ADS (Undated) - The story of how swift boat veterans with a grievance were found by Republicans looking to tarnish Kerry's image, and soon came to be running ads, writing books and blanketing cable television in a modern day tale of the creation of a political attack machine. But some of the veterans have recanted their stories or made charges that military records prove untrue. A look at how the veterans were organized and what they claim. By Kate Zernike and Jim Rutenberg.
With photos and a graphic.
Editors, will move in both full and abridged forms.
Will it say that the Cambodia story has already panned out? I doubt it.
ANOTHER UPDATE: Paul Shelton emails:
Looks like two weeks after having "fled the scene" of the swiftboat vets story, the big media is finally returning to pull Kerry out of the water. O'Neill was on CNN's Lou Dobbs show and then on Newshour with Jim Lehrer. I guess Kerry's apublic acknowledgement of the story today in front of the firefighters gave the coded signal for the big media to finally return to the scene to save him.
Heh. Anybody know if Lehrer mentioned Cambodia?
Thanks for the reference, Glenn. And no, Lehrer chose not to mention Cambodia.
Wednesday, August 18, 2004
Librarians gone wild
A possible reason why the American Library Association has so fiercely opposed parts of the Patriot Act: "Librarians for Terror." Lee Kaplan concludes:
No surprise there. Apparently the ALA also has a soft spot--legally the 1st Amendment right to free speech--for preventing pornography filters in libraries, as well. Who knew librarians were such a wild bunch?
I much prefer this Digital Librarian.
But the fact remains: Those who support the actions and goals of terrorists and oppose Israel’s existence and America’s War on Terror have infiltrated America’s knowledge distribution centers – our libraries. As a result, all of us should take a good, hard look at what is going on at our local libraries and get involved.
No surprise there. Apparently the ALA also has a soft spot--legally the 1st Amendment right to free speech--for preventing pornography filters in libraries, as well. Who knew librarians were such a wild bunch?
I much prefer this Digital Librarian.
WWIV
Norman Podhoretz's "World War IV: How it started, what it means, and why we have to win" ought to be the complement to the 9-11 Commission's book.
Via LGF.
Via LGF.
Security Extended
DHS plans on a greater emphasis on protecting ports, rail systems and air cargo. Recommendations also include national standards for a driver's license, seamless biometric borders and possibly a national ID.
It's about time. And the debate will continue to rage.
It's about time. And the debate will continue to rage.
Tuesday, August 17, 2004
Computer Forensics
The Justice Deptartment published new guidelines for law enforcement on computer forensics. (via GCN)
Monday, August 16, 2004
More south-western border concerns
The story is apparently getting out.
But there is an up side:
The article suggests that Brazil and Argentina are stepping up their efforts in policing and intelligence. Hopefully this will include cooperation in those areas with the US.
But the politics in an election year of the ostensibly hypersensitive Hispanic voter seems to loom large over this challenge. It ought not.
...identified the Triple Border Area as one of the world's blind spots of terrorism, where organized crime has fused with politically motivated violence.
But there is an up side:
Terror groups may now be more difficult to infiltrate and al Qaeda has become less globalized, but South America may still provide easier opportunities for infiltration than the Middle East and South Asia, since groups tend to mix with locals for business transactions. Also, some of the groups' footmen in the region could be less hardened and committed to their cause.
The article suggests that Brazil and Argentina are stepping up their efforts in policing and intelligence. Hopefully this will include cooperation in those areas with the US.
But the politics in an election year of the ostensibly hypersensitive Hispanic voter seems to loom large over this challenge. It ought not.
Tuesday, August 10, 2004
All not quiet on the western front
It's disturbing that terrorists, including Al Qaeda, have a foothold in South America. Nevertheless, it's good to see that some people are connecting the dots.
We are witness to expanding Islamic terrorist bases in South America, operating with almost no interference from, or in collaboration with, the host countries’ governments; thousands of Arab terrorists training in these bases; and credible evidence that hundreds or even thousands of Arabic speaking illegals have been entering the USA through our porous border with Mexico for almost a year. Given the Border Patrol leadership’s refusal to divulge the ethnic or national identities of the 5,510 non-Hispanic detainees, we cannot know how many of these thousands are Arabs.
Why would Middle Eastern terror groups spend untold millions of dollars to set up bases in South America? Certainly to benefit from the drug trade and money-laundering opportunities that lax or corrupt governments afford. Clearly, to attack South American targets (inter alia, Israeli or American embassies, Jewish communities, and/or other institutions that are involved in South American financial, political, or military interaction with the USA). Probably also to facilitate the planning and execution of future terror attacks in South America or abroad.
Why would Arabs enter the United States in such large numbers? At least some of them are likely bona fide terrorists who, once they have eluded the Border Patrol, can connect with established contacts in the American Muslim community and lay the groundwork for future terror attacks within this country. It takes a minimum of five “support-staff” to launch one terrorist action. How many terror attacks can we expect, now that we know now that hundreds or perhaps thousands of Arab terrorists have entered this country illegally during the past year, and are completely untraceable by law enforcement or military agencies.
Why would hundreds of these Arab terrorists sneak into America illegally via the Mexican border? The credible scenarios are:
These Arabs are known terrorists who could not enter in a simpler and more direct fashion, via our legal ports of entry; or…
The terror planners and strategists foresee that if our legal ports of entry were suddenly flooded with dozens or hundreds of entrants recognizable as Arabs but bearing legal South American travel documents, our immigration officials might get suspicious.
Thus, to infiltrate very large numbers of terrorists into the United States in anticipation of future massive terror assaults, it would be necessary to create a base for the invaders in neighboring safe areas from which large numbers of terrorists could be transported en masse.
Web hosting for terrorist sites
Some suggestions on what to do about terrorist websites hosted in the US and abroad:
I get a queazy feeling visiting the sites listed in the article. But I'd probably feel much more than queazy if I could read Arabic. Hopefully someone in our government or in the private sector who can is doing some websurfing.
To deal with this problem Congress needs to enact tough legislation that Web hosting companies in the U.S. must log complaints about terrorist Websites and report them to the FBI or Homeland Security immediately. Failure to do so should cost a $100,000 fine and jail time.
The Web hosting executive quoted above said the best way to shut down these sites was first to tell the Web host that the sites are in violation of the Web host’s terms and conditions and, if that doesn’t work, to alert the FBI or other government authorities. But he admitted some Web hosts might be reluctant to close a site down for fear of losing income.
I get a queazy feeling visiting the sites listed in the article. But I'd probably feel much more than queazy if I could read Arabic. Hopefully someone in our government or in the private sector who can is doing some websurfing.
Sunday, August 08, 2004
Internet privacy: criminal loophole or 1st Amndt right?
The crime control model clashes with the due process argument in a homework assignment for my Survey of Criminal Justice 100 online class. It seems fairly accurate that a little bit of legal education can be dangerous in the wrong hands. Maybe the Criminology class this fall will help correct any of my misconceptions.
Ch 17 Cyber crime
1 Will this mean that existing constitutional freedoms and liberties may be infringed upon?
No. In fact, the opposite is probably true. Maybe a better question to ask is why the relatively high level of anonymity and privacy provided by the internet—more privacy than constitutionally provided in face-to-face dealings, in snail mail, or over the phone—has been allowed for so long to remain relatively lawless? This has created a criminal loophole that is being exploited in ways that are not legal outside of cyberspace. As a result, developing legislation for the internet isn’t about infringing upon our existing constitutional freedoms. It’s simply about applying laws covering physical and telephone activities that can now be committed online and addressing the criminal loophole.
For example, is it justice if a stalker from a state with no cyber-stalking laws gets away with it simply because there was no existing law? Would that infringe upon our liberties to enact some kind of law? Of course not.
In fact, there are many virtual crimes that need law enforcement involvement in almost exactly the same manner that these crimes are dealt with in the physical world. These physical-world crimes include stalking, verbal threats, verbal assault, hate speech, incitement, indecency, “imminent threat,” adult clubs, prostitution, sex with minors, propositioning a minor, gambling, theft, auction fraud, money laundering, intellectual property rights theft, non-delivery of goods purchased, terrorism, white collar crime and embezzlement. These all translate into virtual crimes (with the possible exception of the actual physical act in sex, although cybersex almost counts.) Also, many companies with whom we do physical business tend to share our personal information with others, often without our knowledge. Law enforcement can frisk, pat down, question, check our suitcases/baggage, arrest, stop at sobriety checkpoints, etc., with reasonable suspicion, probable cause and/or warrants from judges. The same ought to apply in cyberspace.
After the “physical crimes” there are also the crime/privacy balances that already exist in regular postal/mail services, on phone lines, and on television. These can include some of the previous physical crimes as well as new ones like verbal threats, hate mail, mail fraud, credit card number theft, identity theft, cellular telephone terrorism communications and pornography sent through the mail. The postal service and/or law enforcement can inspect, open and confiscate mail suspected of carrying contraband/drugs, monitor phone lines and cell phones, tap phone lines and get copies of phone records. Concerning “anonymity and privacy,” mail currently won’t be delivered unless it has a return address and name identifying the sender. This information can be accessed by law enforcement officials. The same ought to apply in cyberspace with traceable email names, web addresses and possibly even IP addresses. Besides, private firms already use software to track internet users by their IP addresses wherever they go in cyberspace.
So both the “physical crimes” and crimes through the mail, TV and phone system all have constitutionally-correct existing legislation and law enforcement responses. It’s simply a matter of applying them to their internet applications. Right now, there are relatively fewer restrictions both on criminals and on law-abiding citizens. It is not unreasonable to adjust this imbalance. So, in fact, the talk of possible internet legislation being an “infringement of liberties” talk is largely BS. It’s no surprise, however, to hear it coming from the soft on crime liberal text author and hysteric, racist and partisan special interest groups like the ACLU.
2 How might First Amendment rights be infringed by law enforcement agencies attempting to protect the public from cyber oriented crimes?
I don’t really think there is a substantial difference in the constitutionality of law enforcement addressing crimes committed online versus crimes committed in the flesh, over the phone or through the mail service. But one example might be software to filter pornography. That seems to bother lots of child molesters and liberals in our schools and libraries, who have fought against them by claiming 1st Amendment rights to pornography as free speech. Another one might be that adults who attempt to set up meetings for sex with minors might get their liberty infringed a bit through sting operations. But the internet can’t compartmentalize pornography like a physical adult book or movie shop. They can’t check ID’s at the counter in cyberspace, so it is reasonable and necessary to provide some hurdle to the access of online pornography by minors. Also, people who use hate speech and threats online might feel a bit infringed, as would bomb-making book publishers and possibly users who access similar terrorism education and dissemination websites. I’ve seen plenty of Islamic chat room comments inciting violence and urging the killing of “infidels” which included specific individuals and methods.
One of the more substantive complaints around is that email and internet chat-rooms can be monitored and recorded by law enforcement. But as I mentioned above, phone lines can currently be monitored and phone records subpoenaed, often with the approval of a judge. So the Carnivore software system that monitors the internet with a court order is basically the same thing. The Total Information Awareness program and CAPPSII programs for tracking terrorists provide to some critics a more controversial mix of information shared through connected databases of consumer, criminal, public and private information. The ACLU and others have, of course, cried foul. And before the 9-11 Commission came out with its findings, the media as well launched an offensive against the programs. They succeeded in getting them shelved because of politics in this election year, but the Department of Homeland Security will likely benefit enough from congressional hearings currently being held and a pr campaign of its own to garner additional support for their passage. Ironically, even the much heralded 9-11 Commission made reference to the need for the CAPPSII program and other information sharing programs that could have identified and apprehended some of the 9-11 terrorists.
...
Wednesday, August 04, 2004
ACLU's Dilemma
Is the ACLU acting in bad faith regarding federal funds and terror watch lists?
At least the serious debate has begun in earnest.
Not to worry, purred executive director Anthony Romero. Romero smugly revealed that he had never had any intention of actually checking the terror watch lists. Federal law merely prohibits "knowingly" employing or funding terrorists, explained this sophist. So long as the organization carefully avoided actually looking at the government's terror watch list, it could go right on funding whomever it pleased and still be in compliance with federal requirements.
...
Such fantasies make for great fundraising pitches. The ACLU has been raking in the dough — and not just from payroll deductions — since 9/11. But the Left's blindness to the reality of foreign enemies should utterly disqualify it from government influence. That is not the case. Civil libertarians and privacy advocates exercise veto power over government research in the crucial fields of data mining and computer technology. The Department of Homeland Security recently cancelled a program to screen airline passengers for terrorist connections because privacy advocates objected.
At least the serious debate has begun in earnest.
