X-Ray Vision an Expensive Success
September 7, 2006: One of the more successful counter-terrorism technologies has been n new, and portable, version of an old one. The old tech is backscatter radar. Originally developed during the Cold War, to provide a long range (over the horizon) radar, there is now a portable (carried in a van) version called the "Ruggedized Detection Imaging Modules" (RDIM). The Department of Defense now has 67 of these units in Iraq and Afghanistan.

These are the X-Ray machines that can see through clothing, and inside vehicles, and distinguish between organic and inorganic material. RDIM provides a photo quality image in seconds. The subject has to stand in front of the RDIM. Now normally, you could check someone for bombs on their person by just patting them down. But suicide bombers tend to set off their bombs when they perceive a pat-down coming. So a RDIM could be set up so that the operator and the subjects are far enough away from each other that, if a suicide bomber is encountered, you only lose the machine. That can be expensive, for these rigs go for $1.5 million each, and cost over $20,000 a month to maintain. The Department of Defense began with four RDIMs in early 2005, but quickly obtained more when it was discovered how useful the units are.

strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20060907.aspx

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-terrorism_in_Singapore

Counter-terrorism in Singapore is a series of measures implemented in Singapore aiming to detect and prevent potential terrorism acts and to minimize damages should they occur. These measures involve all levels of society including defence, internal security, borders and infrastructure security, civil defence, medical readiness as well as psychological preparedness. Singapore also actively participate in the international effort on counter-terrorism.


Homeland security

The Singapore Police Force has in recently years enhanced security at various locations in the country.
On August 15, 2005, the newly established Police MRT Unit begins operational patrols on the Mass Rapid Transit network to protect the public transport system. Special forces from Special Operations Command (SOC) and the Gurkha Contingent (GC) have also been deployed to complement other police officers on patrol. The Police Coast Guard (PCG) stepped up its effort to check ferries and other vessels in Singapore territorial waters.
On October 26, 2005, Deputy Prime Minister and Co-ordinating Minister for Security and Defence S Jayakumar announces that Singapore is developing an early warning system, called the Risk Assessment and Horizon Scanning, to identify and assess new emerging threats to national security. The system, developed by the National Security Coordination Secretariat, will be put in place by mid-2007. [11]
[edit]

Counter terrorist specialised units
At the forefront in the fight against terrorism are the specialised military, law enforcement and civil defence units, namely:
• Singapore Special Operations Force,
• Special Operations Command,
• Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Explosive Defence Group
[edit]


Main article: Exercise Northstar V
In January 2006, a large scale emergency preparedness exercise, codenamed Exercise Northstar V, was conducted. It involved 22 agencies and 2,000 emergency personnel. An additional 3,400 commuters also participated in the exercise. The exercise involved a simulated terrorist bomb attack on four MRT stations and one bus interchange. There were 500 mock casualties suffering from "injuries" caused by the "explosions" as well as chemical agents. [12]
[edit]

Social cohesion
One of the aims of Jemaah Islamiyah is to exploit race and religion issues to create instablity in the region and to stir up conflict between Singapore and Malaysia. Following the arrests of JI members, then Prime Minister Goh Chok Tong held dialogues with the leaders of the Muslim community which makes up 15 per cent of Singapore population. Details of the investigations were shared to explain that the arrests were not targeted against the Singapore Muslim community or Islam. In schools and workplaces, inter racial confidence circles were formed to promote better inter racial and inter religious understanding between the different communities.
Islamic scholars and counselors in Singapore participated in the rehabilitation of the detained JI members, hence giving the Muslim community a role in the ideological aspect of the fight against terrorism. Singapore's housing and education policies continue to ensure that the Muslim community in Singapore is well integrated with other communities in schools, housing estates and the workplace.
Group representation constituency were introduced in 1988 to ensure minority communities are represented in the Parliament of Singapore. In the Cabinet, Yaacob Ibrahim holds a position called Minister-in-charge of Muslim Affairs who looks into issues pertaining to the Muslim community. This would also ensure that Muslim sentiments are heard at the highest level of government.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Counter-terro...ecialised_units

Bomb Builder University
August 26, 2006: Islamic terrorists who know how to build bombs have become a major target for counter-terror operations. The bomb builders are relatively rare. Far more people are willing to plant the bomb, or set it off. As the Israelis learned in the last five years, if you want to stop terrorist bombers, concentrate on the bomb builders. The Palestinians didn't have too many to begin with, and they were often highly educated, or simply bright, individuals who applied their skills to the dangerous task of building bombs.

In Iraq is was different. Thousands of Iraqis obtained bomb making skills, often from Russian instructors, during the 1980s war with Iran. In that conflict, roadside bombs and booby traps were a favorite weapon against the aggressive Iranians. After Iraq's invasion of Iran in 1980, the Iranians soon recovered, and were on the offensive for the next seven years. The Iraqis had a hard time stopping the enraged Iranians, who eventually agreed to a ceasefire in 1988. The thousands of Iranians lost to the Iraqi roadside bombs and booby traps played a role in the decision to stop the war. The Iraqi veterans who built those bombs were disproportionately Sunni Arabs. Saddam did not want Kurds or Shia Arabs knowing how to build these battlefield weapons that could also be used by terrorists.

Those bomb making skills went unused through the 1990s, but in 2003, there was again demand. And the demand grew as Baath Party and al Qaeda money was spent to try and regain Sunni Arab control of Iraq. That hasn't worked, but the bombs have killed nearly 800 Americans, and many more Iraqis.

Iran noted the Iraqi use of improvised bombs during the 1980s, and established their own bomb making schools. There, Hizbollah bomb makers from Lebanon were trained to build bombs, for be use against Israeli troops. In the last few years, some of that bomb making knowledge has been shared with Palestinian terrorist groups like Hamas, and Shia Arab Islamic terrorists in southern Iraq. Iran is believed to have also trained some al Qaeda terrorists, although that is hard to believe. Al Qaeda has a policy of killing Shia militants at every opportunity. But because of the pressure from Western counter-terrorism efforts, al Qaeda and Iranian terrorists appear to have engaged in some cooperation. This may have included sharing bomb building knowledge.

http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/ar...aspx?comments=Y

Tackling Terrorism

Australia's aid program is involved in a number of long-term anti-terrorism projects in the Asia-Pacific Region. These projects are helping the region to understand and change the conditions that can foster terrorism.
The shocking events of 11 September 2001 and 12 October 2002 forced the issue of international terrorism onto the front page of every newspaper in the Asia-Pacific region. The world is now grappling with the issue of how to defeat global terrorism.

The United Nations and other international organisations, such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), are working with their members to develop the capabilities needed to combat terrorism. Countries are now required by the UN and the OECD to strengthen areas such as customs and the banking sector.
The region's forums, like the ASEAN Regional Forum and APEC, have also agreed on anti-terrorism measures. Australia is working closely with its neighbours to assist them in meeting the commitments they have agreed to implement.
Aid in areas such as customs and finance will help the region to restore growth and confidence and develop measures to counter terrorism.
Indonesia

Australia is providing assistance to Indonesia to combat terrorism, estimated at $10 million over four years. This assistance will see Indonesia improve its capacity to deal with terrorism through:
• Increasing Indonesia's police force capacity to counter terrorism and transnational crime
• Enhancing travel security and border control by working with Indonesia's transport, immigration and customs areas
• With assistance from other countries, strengthening Indonesia's financial sector and developing measures to restrict the flow of financing to terrorists.

In December 2002 the two countries co-chaired the Conference on Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing held in Bali. Representatives from 31 regional countries attended the conference.
Asia-Pacific
Australia is providing assistance to developing countries in the Asia-Pacific region to ensure that law enforcement, customs and immigration authorities have a greater capacity to detect and deal with people who may be involved in terrorism.
In March 2002 Australia, with the United States and New Zealand sponsored an anti-terrorism workshop for the Pacific Island countries.
The meeting of the Pacific Forum in August 2002 resulted in the Nasonini Declaration on Regional Security. The declaration commits Pacific Island countries to act together in response to security challenges. Pacific Forum members also agreed to put into practice internationally agreed anti-terrorism measures.
Following the declaration, Australia provided support to establish a working group to develop a regional plan to deal with terrorism. The regional framework will include model legislation and in-country legislative drafting assistance to deal with terrorism.

The Australian Government also provided assistance to the ASEAN Regional Forum, which in 2002 ran a workshop for participants from ASEAN countries on the prevention of terrorism and enhancement of anti-terrorism capabilities.
Money Laundering
Australia is providing assistance across the region to combat terrorist financing and money laundering.

Australia, through its aid program, has provided $50,000 for workshops and meetings organised by the Asia-Pacific Group on Money Laundering.
In Papua New Guinea, an Australian adviser has assisted the government to draft the 'proceeds of crime' legislation aimed at countering the financial flows from international criminal activity.

Customs
Australia is also undertaking a range of customs and immigration activities that will support or complement the objectives of the Secure Trade in the APEC Region (STAR) Initiative. These include:
• A $1.45m customs project in ASEAN developing economies to improve customs administration procedures and processes and to assist with the adoption of international best practices relevant to cargo clearance
• Implementing an automated customs data systems in Papua New Guinea and the Pacific
• Strengthening customs audit procedures in Indonesia
• Travel document fraud detection workshops run by the Department of Immigration Multicultural and Indigenous Affairs (DIMIA) for officials in Indonesia, Thailand, Malaysia, Papua New Guinea and Vietnam
• A trial of Australia's (DIMIA) Advance Passenger Processing system in Malaysia
• Strengthened cooperation between DIMIA and Indonesian immigration and police authorities to detect third-country nationals and to share information on people smuggling
• Customs integrity self-assessment workshops provided by the Australian Customs Service to assist China, Indonesia, Philippines and Vietnam to complete the World Customs Organisation's Self-Assessment Guidelines
• A project in China to help develop electronic cargo manifests that satisfy both customs and port requirements.
http://www.ausaid.gov.au/hottopics/topic.c...44_39_2531_3008

Tackling Terrorism On High Seas

Navy, Coast Guard forge new links to secure Indian Ocean

Huma Siddiqui

India and China conducting joint naval exercises? Something unthinkable is happening in the waters around the sub-continent. Major trading nations are coming together to combat high seas terrorism and nowhere is this cooperation more visible than in the Indian Ocean. For a country that viewed with suspicion any foreign vessel entering the ocean named after it, India is today engaging almost every major power through joint exercises in and around the Indian Ocean.
Both the Indian Navy and the Coast Guard are thinking big, blue and brown. Joint naval exercises are being conducted with the US, Russia, Japan, Australia, Indonesia, Singapore, Britain, France, Iran, Oman and many others and there’s more to come. Perhaps South Korea and South Africa will come next. Israel may not be far off nor could Myanmar.
The senior service is policing virtually the entire Indian Ocean, exercising with half a dozen navies while the Coast Guard is planning to set up 13 more stations thus virtually sealing the maritime border. The setting up of the Andamans and Nicobar command of the Indian Navy was a turning point, and the growth of high seas terrorism in the Indian Ocean the context.
With India likely to get 50,000 to 90,000 square kilometres of the continental shelf for economic exploitation, there is a growing realisation that the country’s future economic and military strength could be in the sea. At present the territorial waters are up to just 12 nautical miles and exclusive economic zone up to 200. With new acquisitions like the stealth ship INS Talwar, the Navy is gearing up for a bigger role.
Both the Navy and the Coast Guard are equipping themselves not only to protect the larger maritime zone, but also to police the entire waters from Madagascar, Mozambique and the Gulf of Oman in the west to the Malacca Straits, and probably South China Sea in the east.
Commodore Uday C Bhaskar, deputy director, IDSA, warns that terrorists could use containers on ships to transport weapons and dangerous materials, or could use the containers themselves as weapons of mass destruction to trigger more attacks. Coast Guard too needs to be better equipped and prepared to deal with such attacks, he said.
According to a report issued by a US based think tank The Rand, “the potential threat of terrorists using containers poses a large risk to our economies and to our societies. Since 11 September 2001, the awareness of terrorists’ actions has clearly risen. This increase, however, has not been as substantial in all fields as it has been in the air transport sector.”
According to JS Bedi, chief of staff at the western naval command, “more hardware will be needed for protecting the continental shelf.”
The Coast Guard has put up a proposal to set up 13 more stations, seven of them on the west coast, three on the east and the remaining on the island territories.
Policing requests are already pouring. After patrolling the eastern waters with the Indonesian navy last year, Indian naval ships escorted US ships in the Malacca Straits for three months, provided seaward security during the African Union summit in Mozambique, and patrolled the Mauritian waters twice. INS Mumbai is exercising with the Indonesian navy on its voyage past the Malacca Straits into South China Sea.
Policing ports is another issue, as ownership of the ports is often vague. Most ports are not owned and operated by national governments, which makes the imposition of legislation difficult, points out the Rand report. “Our strategy towards the littoral will perforce have to be a combination of diplomatic, economic and naval moves,” say defence analysts.
The Navy is fast making up for what Admiral Madhavendra Singh calls “the lost decade” of 1985-1995 when it bought next to nothing from abroad or India’s own shipyards. “One pays for this two decades later; so we have to order more now and extend the life of the ships in service,” said Admiral Singh after receiving the Russian-built stealth ship INS Talwar in Mumbai in August. “Even if you give orders to all the shipyards, they can’t deliver all that we want. So we have to get a few from abroad.”
With ships like Talwar having a cruising range of 4,500 nautical miles, with the three supply ships (Aditya, Jyoti and Shakti) allowing the fleets to operate away from shore for more than three months anywhere in the Indian Ocean, and with HDW submarines having 45 to 50 days endurance, the Indian Navy is already in blue waters.
In fact, with a little more hardware and manpower, the Navy believes it can tackle both China and Pakistan at the same time, a claim which neither of the other two services can make.
“Ensuring that the maritime domain particularly the sea lines of communication remain safe, the presence of Indian Navy is very important,” Commodore Bhaskar said.
Indeed, the threats are also growing. Apart from Chinese activity on the Myanmar front, Pakistan is offering berthing facilities to Chinese warships at the new Gwadar port west of Karachi. The Coast Guard has had a taste of success in handling the Alondra Rainbow piracy in November 1999 by arresting the pirates and the hijacked ship. Last year it exercised with coastal forces of Japan, the Maldives, Mauritius and the Seychelles. Emerging as the most capable agency in South Asia that can fight sea pollution, the Coast Guard was willing even to clean up the spillage off Karachi caused by a sinking tanker. “It was war in the ocean that guided the thinking process in maritime security,” said Inspector-General Prabhakaran Paleri, deputy director-general of the Coast Guard. “The concept is changing. There are other conflict situations too. A stealth attack by a terrorist group on a harbour, hijack, fights between fishermen - all these are security situations where armed intervention may be called for.”
“The challenge for Indian Navy is to maximize options and to engage with everyone in the littoral on our own terms,” opine experts. Island territories too are now perceived as much more sensitive than before.
“We have 598 islands near shore, 572 in the Andaman-Nicobar group and 27 in Lakshadweep,” pointed out Inspector General Paleri. “We already have seven maritime neighbours. When the legal continental shelf regime comes, Oman would be an eighth maritime neighbour.” India has MoUs with Singapore, Indonesia and Sri Lanka on a variety of security subjects linked with cooperation, bilateral exercises and maritime security.
“India has been at the receiving end of terrorism for over a decade. And is being looked up to as a mature state committed to fight terrorism and piracy. Today many regional nations and even US and Japan are looking to India to de facto become more and more responsible for maritime security in the Indian Ocean as it has a large and capable navy and efficient coast guard which even rescued a Japanese ship,” pointed out Commodore (retd) Ranjit B Rai.
It is no wonder most nations are keen to forge closer maritime links with India to ensure the dense sea lanes of the Indian Ocean are kept under surveillance and trade can flow with out disruption at all times. Concurrently, discussions are going on for security measures to be introduced on board merchant ships short of permitting merchantmen to carry small arms,” Commodore Rai added.
In fact, Singapore is reported to have given notice to the shipping community that any vessel that is not “adequately protected against possible terrorist attacks will be barred from entering Singapore from July next year.” Ships will at that time have to comply with the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code. Singapore authorities have said that they will begin testing vessels starting in January and will conduct drills in April to ascertain whether ships are meeting the code.
The security measures firstly entail that all ships and ports have automatic identification systems to track ships while at sea. Secondly, ships must have a security alert system as well as a security plan designating who will carry out certain functions. Finally, ships must also conduct drills to test their security measures.
For the Indian Coast guards, more than hardware, concern is about manpower. Operating with just 60 per cent of sanctioned strength, it today has five out of every seven persons at sea. As Vice Admiral Suresh Mehta, director-general of Coast Guard, pointed out a few months ago, “setting up a station is easy, especially with state governments willing to give land. But we have a shortage of manpower.”


URL: http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_st...ontent_id=45550

http://www.financialexpress.com/fe_full_st...ontent_id=45550

Tackling the threat of nuclear terrorism

The only effective way to tackle the threat of nuclear terrorism is to abolish nuclear weapons and establish strict international control of all fissile materials that could be used to make new weapons, argue three US physicians in this week’s BMJ.
In the aftermath of 11 September 2001, nuclear terrorism has emerged as a real threat and could take several forms, from an attack on nuclear power plants and reactors to the detonation of a nuclear bomb in an urban area, write the authors.
Using computer technology, they have calculated the potential impact of a major nuclear explosion at ground level in New York City. The blast and thermal effects of such an explosion would kill 52,000 people instantly, and direct radiation would cause 44,000 cases of radiation sickness, of which 10,000 would be fatal. Radiation from fallout would kill another 200,000 people and cause several hundred thousand additional cases of radiation sickness. In the wake of such an attack, the ability to aid survivors would be very limited.
The international community urgently needs to expand its effort to secure existing stockpiles of nuclear weapons and materials, particularly in Russia, Pakistan, and India. The efforts of the al-Qaeda network to obtain nuclear weapons or weapons grade nuclear materials are particularly worrying, say the authors.
Achieving this goal must be among the most urgent of all public health priorities, they conclude.
http://www.eurekalert.org/pub_releases/200...j-ttt020602.php

Tackling Cyber Terrorism

- New Straits Times (CompuTimes)
By Anuja Ravendran

While the corporate world has its share of worries over security threats, governments are facing a threat of a different form - cyber terrorism.
Cyber terrorism is a security threat which lurks in cyberspace that is becoming an international concern for most developed countries because of their increasing exposure and dependency on computer networks, says Top Layer Networks International's vice president Asia-Pacific Alex Turkington.
He says the Sept 11 attacks on the United States has acted as a catalyst to draw attention towards attacks of this type. "They are beginning to realise that these 'terrorists' can get hold of critical information. By doing this, they have the capability to knock out vital infrastructure, crippling industries such as telecommunications, energy and utilities, transport and distribution systems, defence and emergency as well as banking and financial institutions."
This has resulted in a dramatic increase in budgets for internal and external intelligence, law enforcement agencies and government funding for research and investment in security equipment, Turkington says.
In order to counter these threats, he says organisations need to strengthen their perimeter security by increasing the performance and availability of current security devices like firewalls and intrusion detection systems through load balancing.
Also, he adds that they can stop attacks that traditional security cannot mitigate by filtering out DoS, distributed DoS and hypertext transfer protocol (HTTP) worms before they reach the firewall.
And Turkington suggests that organisations provide consolidated management and reporting facilities to capture security event data for network planning and management, prevention of security issues and prosecution of offenders.
Apart from cyber terrorism, some other security industry trends include monitoring of employee communications, migration of virus checking into network security infrastructure and adoption of distributed defence where security is no longer just in the perimeter anymore.
http://www.toplayer.com/content/cm/news174.jsp

Best Deterrent Against Terrorism
"If the 21st century wishes to free itself from the cycle of violence, acts of terror and war, and avoid the repetition of the 20th century - that most disaster - ridden century of humankind; there is no other way, except by understanding and putting into practice every human right for all mankind, irrespective of race, gender, faith, nationality or social status. In anticipation of that day and with much gratitude"
Shirin Ebadi, (b. 1947) upon accepting the Nobel Peace Prize in Oslo, Norway, on December 10, 2003. Ms. Ebadi is a lawyer and human rights and democracy activist. Both in her research and as an activist, she is known for promoting peaceful, democratic solutions to serious problems in society.

This year's Nobel Prize, worth $US1.32 million, was given to Ebadi from a record field of 165 candidates, including Pope John Paul II and former Czech President Vaclav Havel.

http://www.azer.com/aiweb/categories/magaz...otes_ebadi.html

MILNET: Countering State-Sponsored Terrorism

An Authorized Mirror Document from
The International Policy Institute for Counter-Terrorism (ICT)

Countering State-Sponsored Terrorism
Boaz Ganor, ICT

Introduction / Report on State-Sponsored Terrorism / State Involvement in Terrorist Attacks
Types of State Involvement in International Terrorism / Rationality of States Involvement in Terrorism
The "Price Scale" / Adjusting the Price of Involvement in Terrorism
International Measures against Terrorism / Conflicts of Interests / Secondary Boycott - The D’Amato Law
The "Critical Dialogue" - A Utilitarian Argument / Buying Silence - The Security Argument
Damage to the Population - The Moral Argument / Struggle against Terrorism as An American Interest
Breakdown of International Unity / An International Institution to Fight Terrorism
An International Agenda for the Struggle against States Involved in Terrorism

http://www.milnet.com/ict/counter.htm

Subject: Dogs of war

Dogs best bet to detect bombs, landmines, IEDs--- Here is an article from Pak defe forums about Dogs in Kashmir.

http://www.strategypage.com/militaryforums/93-6446.aspx




Dogs in olive brave Valley terror
When Sergeant Harry and his fellow officers from the US's famed dog squad hogged headlines during George Bush's visit to India, our dogs in olive sulked: "We do daring stuff like track down landmines and explosives. We don't just go around sniffing at Rajghat. And yet, no one talks of us."

That sounds like a brooding breed, but they are right. The Army's dog squad has a success rate of 99.9 per cent in sniffing out explosives and tracking down militants in Jammu and Kashmir. Now, the Army top brass in the Valley wants at least 1,000 dogs to be deployed with units fighting insurgency. The Army is also training them to be paratroopers - they are expected to jump out of airplanes along with their handlers so that they can be parachuted during special operations.

Officers serving in counter-terrorism operations in J&K say the terrorists are terrified of the dog squads. They have intercepted messages between terrorist groups that go: "There is a new dog in the sector. He is very dangerous, get rid of him as soon as possible".

Speaking to HT, a senior officer of the Remount Veterinary Corps said that whenever the dogs have gone out with road opening parties (ROPs), they have been able to sniff out explosives. "Whenever the para-military or the police leave the dogs behind, the chances of a blast are higher," he said.

The Army has nearly 35 dog units and most of them are used for counter-insurgency tasks in J&K as well as the north-east. The luckier ones are posted on VIP duty and sanitise the area where a VIP is scheduled to visit.

The Army uses Labradors and Alsatians in their dog units who serve for nearly 12 years after which they 'retire'. These dogs and their handlers have won countless commendations and medals for their bravery.

However, working for nearly eight hours a day can take a toll on their health. "These dogs sniff continuously and their heart rate goes up considerably," said the officer
http://www.pakdef.info/forum/showthread.ph...goto=nextnewest

Operation SWIFT

Swift — an acronym for the Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication — forms the epicenter of the global banking industry, and oversees an estimated $6 trillion of inter-bank transfers on a daily basis. The Swift operation, however, does not allow US intelligence officials to gain unfettered access to Swift’s records:
The program was put in place shortly after the 9/11 attacks and is viewed as a vital tool for choking off terrorist financing.

In terms of efficacy, the Swift operation is credited for the capture of leading al-Qaeda terrorist, Riduan Isamuddin, or "Hambali." Hambali, is believed to have been the mastermind behind the 2002 Bali bombing, which claimed the lives of 202 people while injuring hundreds more.
More importantly, the Swift operation has been especially useful for identifying terrorists and terrorist cells within the United States. The program led to the capture and successful prosecution of Uzair Paracha, a Pakistani national, who laundered $200,000 for an al-Qaeda operative in his home country.
Despite appeals from the Bush Administration as well as several current and former government officials — both Democrat and Republican — the New York Times and the Los Angeles Times decided to break a story today that could have far-reaching effects on America’s War on Terror.
The story concerns a covert intelligence program, the "Swift operation," that enables US intelligence agencies to access and examine the banking transactions of suspected terrorists.


By breaking this story, the NY and LA Times have exposed a classified and effective operation that goes to the heart of America’s national security. According to government officials, the Swift operation is the largest effort yet at tracing terrorist financing, which helps to explain the Administration’s — and other officials’ — desire to keep it secret, especially from the enemy.

http://partisantimes.typepad.com/partisan_...nal_securi.html

New device counters terrorism, keeps troops alive
By Cheryl Boujnida

WASHINGTON (Army News Service, July 21, 2005) – The Army has developed a new device to thwart terrorist activities while saving service members’ lives.

The Improvised Explosive Devices (IED) Countermeasure Equipment, otherwise known as ICE, was developed by a team of engineers, scientists and Soldiers at White Sands Missile Range in New Mexico to defeat IEDs, the most prominent threat to deployed service members in Iraq.

The ICE device, which is roughly the size of a bread box, uses commercial and military technology to defeat IEDs, said Maj. Raymond D. Pickering, who helped lead the ICE design team at White Sands during its development. Thousands of ICE systems are being utilized by all of the military services, and thousands of more are on order according to Pickering.

He said that the design process involved thinking like a terrorist and acting like one too – fast.

“In the old days, we fought wars by buying a tank and then the enemy would buy a tank and try to defeat ours – that whole process took years,” he said. “Nowadays, terrorists use mortar and artillery shells as weapons," Pickering said, explaining that they combine those with commercial items to quickly design new hybrid systems.

Due to the combined efforts of engineers, scientists and Soldiers working at the Army Research Laboratory at White Sands Missile Range and New Mexico State University’s Physical Science Laboratory, ICE was conceptualized and fielded in less than six months.

“Normally, it takes years to develop a prototype, test, manufacture and field it. The desire to get a product in the hands our fighting forces immediately and prevent further casualties overcame the lengthy process,” Pickering said.

Shane Cunico, the lead ICE engineer at White Sands, said that everyday there’s a delay in the process means a service member may not come home.

“Approximately three service members are killed by an IED everyday,” he said. “We had to get the product into their hands as fast as we could because even one day means something.”

Cunico said the military’s old acquisition process is costly in terms of time and money (millions of dollars) and that a terrorist can wipe out all of the work done by engineers by switching to a new weapon.

“Countering terrorism is like a big chess game where you make one move and they make another - it’s crucial that we stay one or two moves ahead of them,” he said.

For their engineering efforts, Cunico, Pickering and Sam Mares, lead engineer at New Mexico State University, recently received one of the Army’s Greatest Inventions Award for 2004, an annual competition to recognize excellence in achievement.

Richard Flores, White Sands manager for Survivability/Lethality Analysis Directorate and Army Research Laboratory, said the award and the impact of the device in terms of lives saved would not be possible without their sacrifice.

“They truly exemplified the Army spirit of working as a team,” Flores said.

Cunico stressed ICE is an important development because it is an adaptable piece of equipment. “It’s not a static device – we can add to its capabilities. If the process is too time consuming, the military ends up with a big paperweight that costs a lot of money and can’t be adapted to the changing pace of terrorists.”

There are other IED counter measure systems on the market that all serve a value, but ICE is different, he said.

“It’s unique in the fact that it’s a government design; it has programmability, can be fielded at a rapid pace and has an unlimited capacity in terms of manufacturing,” Cunico said. “Engineers can design almost anything, but it’s important to get the product to the Soldier to see how it’s tactically used because it affects design feasibility.”

Cunico and Pickering both agree that Soldier input is crucial to engineering a useful product. “We have received a lot of positive feedback from the field and since then we have developed 5,000 remote control cables that can be used from the front seat or passenger side of a Humvee to activate the device,” Cunico said.

They also stressed that there are a lot of people involved with ICE who believe in what they’re doing.

“There was no ego involved – it required the efforts of many selfless people to get this product out there to save lives,” Cunico said. He stated that without John Tirrell, a Joint IED Task Force member, and Marine Corps Maj. Bruce Paterson to kick down the first doors of bureaucracy, ICE would not be where it is today – in the hands of service members who need it. Cunico also credits the strong leadership of Major Terrece Harris, Pickering's replacement who continues to lead the ICE program through its most critical stages.

In terms of maintenance, ICE can be repaired by Soldiers in theater at the unit level. Recalling a Marine who did not want to part with his box, Cunico smiled.

“He brought his box in to be reprogrammed and the shop told him to come back the next day, but he told them he was willing to wait because he was not leaving without it,” Cunico said. “It’s heartening to know our efforts really mean something to folks out there.”

He said companies such as Canberra Aquila, Delta Engineering Group, Inc. and Raytheon Technical Services are working together to bring service members home to their families safely. “Naturally there’s competition, but they’re coordinating to give us what we need and build a common product for America’s service members.”

“We shifted our focus from missiles to a new emerging threat... With ICE, this is how we think we can address the agile enemy but the battle will continue,” Pickering said.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/lib...21-arnews01.htm

The Attack at the WTC Buildings, New York (9/11)
Five years ago, 19 men hijacked four commercial airplanes and crashed them into the World Trade Centre in New York City, the Pentagon in Washington D.C. and a field in Somerset County, Pennsylvania on Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2001.
On that day, security at the world's busiest airport was changed from quiet precinct duty outside the city of Atlanta to the front line of a war that doesn't necessarily have front lines, to the last line of defense against an enemy that's hard to identify.

Today is the 5th anniversary of the attack at WTC, let’s hope with the improved deterrent in counter terrorism and advances in surveillance technology, these attacks are a things in the past.

Just a recap……

The terrorists
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/natio...igation_24.html

The Attack
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/index_TIME.html

The Timeline of 9/11 Attacks
http://www.nytimes.com/packages/html/nyreg...dex_CHRONO.html

The victims
http://www.nytimes.com/library/national/index_VICTIMS.html

And to add to the above post, the first signs of suspicious behaviour , i.e pilot training requests by were picked up by federal agents on the ground, so to speak. However, their reports were not acted upon in a speedy manner and were initially dismissed as false flags.

Link

This illustrates the importance of even the smallest bit of information that might form the basis of a larger, clearer picture.

Information collation is important. I would love to know what happened to the Pentagon's TIA program. It was officially shunted aside, but as ARPA projects go, they don't really leave the scene do they..

I consider the cancellation of TIA to be one of the more ridiculous setbacks in the war on terror. A post mortem look at the 911 attacks would have illustrated how useful a TIA program was (assuming it worked) in filtering out the noise and helping to focus the agencies limited resources in the right direction. Any way to help the agencies do their jobs more efficiently should be embraced. That the TIA received such opposition is incredible. I do hope that something like TIA is in use by Singapore. It is a good thing that there are no liberal traitors in Singapore to prevent the implementation of a program like that should a Singaporean equivalent exist or be under consideration.

How Robots Defeated the Best Terrorist Weapon

Robots and toys are saving lives in Iraq. The most dangerous "combat support" job is EOD (Explosives Ordnance Disposal.) These are the specialists that dispose of (usually by blowing up) unexploded bombs and shells still lying around the battlefield. In Iraq, EOD teams are also responsible for getting rid of IEDs (Improvised Explosive Devices, usually roadside bombs.) These troops, however, suffer a casualty rate about the same as everyone else, despite working with dangerous explosives all the time. That's because of the robots.

What has made the job a lot less dangerous is the widespread use of special robots, which use a video camera and a mechanical arm to allow the EOD technician to examine, and even disarm, an IED from a distance. New electronic devices enable EOD to prevent wireless detonators on IEDs from going off, or even detonating some types. Details of many of the new EOD electronic tools are kept secret, since the enemy can develop countermeasures if they know too much about what EOD has in their tool kit. The EOD technicians have also found remote control toy trucks useful, for delivering explosives to an IED that could not be disarmed, and appears to still be under the control of enemy operators. The toy truck carries an explosive charge, and a wireless detonator, to destroy the IED. If the hidden enemy can see all this, and decides to set off the IED as the toy truck approaches, the EOD team has prevented the loss of a hundred thousand dollar robot, in exchange for a hundred dollar toy truck.

The use of IEDs by the enemy just about doubled in 2005, to nearly 30 a day, from 2004. The use of IEDs is now declining, in no small part to the increasing number of them that are discovered, and then quickly disabled and destroyed by EOD teams. But the increase in EOD use, and the fact that most of them were spotted before they could go off, overwhelmed the U.S. Army EOD troops. Where response time (to a call for an EOD team) was once about twenty minutes in early 2005, it had risen to hours, at times, by late 2005. Part of that was due to the enemy getting smarter, and setting up fake IEDs, ones that were just fake enough to require an EOD team to be called in. This put more pressure on the EOD teams.
To help out, the navy and air force sent in hundreds of their EOD specialists. Many of these troops were eager to help out. For one thing, here was a chance to do what you were trained for. But there was also the large number of new EOD tools (robots, electronic gadgets) that the navy and air force could only get it they went into a combat zone. The EOD teams in Iraq and Afghanistan got priority on this new gear, so if the air force and navy EOD wanted to get their hands on this new stuff, going to Iraq would do it.

Training Iraqi EOD teams takes time, even if they did that job in the old Iraqi army. Seems that the old Iraqi army EOD standards were quite a bit different, and more dangerous, from the American. So lots of retraining was needed. The Iraqi EOD specialists don't mind, because they get the American robots and some of the other gear, to use. This makes their work a lot safer, and they need all the help they can get. As more Iraqi troops take control of security in parts of central Iraq (where nearly all the IED activity has been), the Iraqis get hit with more IEDs. Indeed, the terrorists and anti-government forces went after the Iraqi army and police with IEDs, believing they would be easier targets than the Americans. Didn't turn out that way, as the Iraqi security forces spoke the language, and had an easier time spotting IEDs, or getting advance warning from local civilians. This often overwhelmed the Iraqi EOD teams, and American teams were frequently backing them up by responding to IED disposal calls from Iraqi troops and police.
IEDs, despite causing most American casualties, have been an expensive failure for the enemy.
The people who build, plant and detonate the IEDs are usually paid, and the pay rate has risen as more of the bomb team members get captured or killed. When only about one in ten IEDs actually hurts any Americans, the terrorist paymasters have found that this kind of warfare is too expensive. Worse yet, American counter-terrorism tactics have emphasized going after the bomb builders, and the paymasters. With more Iraqi police on the street, it's been easier to track down the bomb workshops, bomb builders and everyone involved with IEDs. All of a sudden, a dangerous business got too dangerous.

strategypage.com/htmw/htcbtsp/articles/20060416.as

Didn't know the TIA program tasks till I read the earlier response from LaserL

Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) Program

Program Objective:
The Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) program is a FY03 new-start program. The goal of the Terrorism Information Awareness (TIA) program is to revolutionize the ability of the United States to detect, classify and identify foreign terrorists – and decipher their plans – and thereby enable the U.S. to take timely action to successfully preempt and defeat terrorist acts. To that end, the TIA program objective is to create a counter-terrorism information system that: (1) increases information coverage by an order of magnitude, and affords easy future scaling; (2) provides focused warnings within an hour after a triggering event occurs or an evidence threshold is passed; (3) can automatically queue analysts based on partial pattern matches and has patterns that cover 90% of all previously known foreign terrorist attacks; and, (4) supports collaboration, analytical reasoning and information sharing so that analysts can hypothesize, test and propose theories and mitigating strategies about possible futures, so decision-makers can effectively evaluate the impact of current or future policies and prospective courses of action.

Program Strategy:
The TIA program strategy is to integrate technologies developed by DARPA (and elsewhere as appropriate) into a series of increasingly powerful prototype systems that can be stress-tested in operationally relevant environments, using real-time feedback to refine concepts of operation and performance requirements down to the component level. The TIA program will develop and integrate information technologies into fully functional, leave-behind prototypes that are reliable, easy to install, and packaged with documentation and source code (though not necessarily complete in terms of desired features) that will enable the intelligence community to evaluate new technologies through experimentation, and rapidly transition it to operational use, as appropriate. Accordingly, the TIA program will work in close collaboration with one or more U.S. intelligence agencies that will provide operational guidance and technology evaluation, and act as TIA system transition partners.

Technically, the TIA program is focusing on the development of: 1) architectures for a large-scale counter-terrorism database, for system elements associated with database population, and for integrating algorithms and mixed-initiative analytical tools; 2) novel methods for populating the database from existing sources, create innovative new sources, and invent new algorithms for mining, combining, and refining information for subsequent inclusion into the database; and, 3) revolutionary new models, algorithms, methods, tools, and techniques for analyzing and correlating information in the database to derive actionable intelligence

http://www.iwar.org.uk/news-archive/tia/to...n-awareness.htm

Information Warfare: The Most Dangerous Terrorist Weapon

September 13, 2006: The most dangerous terrorist weapons in the world are not possessed by terrorist groups, but by the U.S. government Red Team organization. This is an outfit that specializes in thinking, and planning, like known, or potential, terrorist groups, and figuring out what kinds of attacks the terrorists might launch. What makes the Red Teams more dangerous is that the group has more resources than any terrorist group. This includes people who have access to everything the U.S. government has on Cyber War weapons, and details of vulnerable American infrastructure.

The problem is simple. American companies, including municipal utilities and air traffic control, are rapidly converting to web based remote control systems. In the past, remote access to factories, sewage or water purification systems, was via custom made, and expensive (to build and maintain) communications systems. It's so much cheaper to do it via the Internet. But Internet based systems are much more vulnerable that the older, custom made ones.

While business and government users know about this vulnerability, and install lots of defenses, the Internet is, well, just more vulnerable. And the Red Teams are always poking around to find out, as much as possible, about just how vulnerable. Now the Red Teams know that they are going to come with attack methods that few, if any, terrorist groups would have the resources to develop. Which is why the data compiled by the Red Teams would be so valuable, and destructive, if it ever fell into the hands of any terrorist groups.

The Red Teams secrets are stored on an air force base. Actually, the Red Teams are part of Sandia Labs, which is part of the Department of Energy (because the labs began as a nuclear weapons developer). All of these organizations have a lot of experience keeping secrets. That, however, can also be a shortcoming. The general public has little idea of exactly what the Red Teams do, how they do it and who they do it to. The government prefers to keep potential enemies in the dark by not commenting. However, there is a feeling that the Red Teams are concentrating too much on defenses, and not enough on going after potential Internet based terrorists. This can be deduced from the fact that any operations to take down Internet terrorists would show up in the news. Then again, there has been, as far as can be seen via open sources, no serious cases of Internet terrorism to date. So any offensive operations against potential threats would not, so to speak, show up on the radar (of general media coverage.)

The Red Team operation also serves commercial and foreign customers, performing security analysis of sites all over the world. This gives the counter-terrorism section of Red Team more information to work with. The Sandia Labs have a reputation for doing very good work, and having it done by very competent people. So, despite all the secrecy about who is doing, or capable of doing, what to whom with what, the good guys appear to have and edge over the terrorists.
strategypage.com/htmw/htiw/articles/20060913.aspx

http://www.ahuracorp.com/first_defender.ht...CFQRZTAod3R9i9Q

Rugged Handheld Chemical Identification System

Tackling food terrorism


2/4/2003-

As the US steps up its activities to tackle bioterrorism, the World Health Organization (WHO) announced this week new guidelines compiled by experts from national agencies to help governments minimise potential terrorist acts against food supplies.
According to WHO, foodborne agents may be responsible for up to 1.5 million deaths from diarrhoea-related conditions alone worldwide each year. In industrialised countries, such as the USA, one person in three may suffer from a foodborne disease annually.
WHO stressed that while only a few cases of intentional contamination of food have been proven, the risk of possible terrorist threats to food should be given serious consideration by public health authorities and the food industry.
The document examines means of establishing basic prevention, surveillance and response capacities. Because both unintentionally and deliberately caused outbreaks of foodborne disease may be managed by many of the same mechanisms, the WHO recommendations concentrate on working with national governments on integrating terrorism prevention and response measures into existing national food safety and disease surveillance programmes.
The role of the food industry in the preventive measures is pivotal and from the outset WHO encourages industry involvement. According to the organization, existing food safety management programmes could be enhanced while establishing appropriate security measures to protect food production and distribution systems. As such, the WHO document provides suggestions for specific measures for consideration by the food industry.
In addition the guidelines look at strengthening existing communicable disease control systems to ensure that surveillance systems are sufficiently sensitive to meet the threat of any food safety emergency. WHO emphasises that the establishment and strengthening of such systems will have a double benefit – not only will they help address the threat of food terrorism and other emergencies, they will also increase governments’ capacity to reduce the increasing burden of foodborne illness.
The need to strengthen existing emergency alert and response systems by improving links with all relevant agencies and with the food industry is given particular consideration by WHO. Many developed and most developing countries are not yet adequately prepared to deal with a large-scale food safety emergency, consequently, stresses WHO, all countries should undertake preparedness and response planning to be able to cope with food safety emergencies regardless of their cause.

Take the hostage out of the picture - virtual government

In the movie "Speed," the SWAT cops played by Keanu Reeves and Jeff Bridges are trying to rescue a booby-trapped elevator full of people, and while they're doing that, the older cop (Bridges) asks the younger one (Reeves) what he would do if confronted by a gunman holding a hostage at gunpoint. Reeves thinks for a minute and says "Shoot the hostage - take her out of the picture" A few minutes later, Bridges' character is held at gunpoint by the man who set the boobytrap. Reeves' character shoots Bridges' character in the leg, leaving the terrorist stunned for a response.

Mass terrorism involves a handful of people killing or threatening to kill hostages or innocent bystanders in order to undermine the people's confidence in their government.

Both Paul and Final Historian make the point that various WMD would disrupt government and society in general. As far as it goes, good point.

But as a nation, America already has the capacity to resist terrorist disruptions - our phone system.

America's phone system is increasingly becoming resistant to terrorist attack. With the widespread use of fiber optics to replace copper wire as "landline," even electromagnetic pulse from use of nuclear explosives in the ionosphere is a solvable problem.

So what? Well, there's no real reason why Congress has to meet physically, is there? Every cable viewer in the country has a seat inside the House and Senate chambers and committee rooms, as well as Parliament - C-Span 1 and 2 are thrown in with most cable packages. Wonderful antidote for insomnia.

But modern technology also makes it possible to dispense with the physical meetings shown on C-Span altogether. All of those speeches could be made, and votes cast electronically.

The problem for the ambitious terrorist who wants to destroy American government has just been made more complex - instead of hitting one city with a special weapon, the terrorist has to hit any number of locations - as many as 550 to get every senator, congressman and the President and his cabinet. If we're at all bright about it, many of those locations will be secret.

This is a much more satisfactory way of insuring governmental continuity than maintaining alternate centers of government at places like Mount Weather (locations which are probably better known to enemy agents and would-be terrorists than they are to the people whose taxes pay for them all).

Think about it - Americans already buy books and do all sorts of other shopping online because it's convenient. Why not govern ourselves thay way, too.

The whole corpus of American bureaucracy could be streamlined and much of it moved to its employees' homes. If the phone, Internet and cable is simply standardized to the broadband fiber-optic standard, there are very few bureaucratic functions which couldn't be handled that way, are there?

This is one government reform that would pay dividends in short order. Much of the General Services Admninistration's budget could be slashed and applied for more urgent matters as Federal office buildings around the nation are shut and sold off, or at least converted from rabbit warrens for Federal employees to Internet server facilities (in which case, their utility bills would fall dramatically as the air-conditioning system is channelled to just the server rooms and a few offices for the server maintenance crew).

This reform also imposes productivity improvements across the board on government agencies. Virtual government is efficient government, and the documentation of every government transaction in the virtual world is both automatic and more accessible than it would at present (where every document exists in several filed-away paper copies as a well as a few electronic ones).

Virtual government in a secure, terrorist-proof electronic setting would, along with Ecommerce, Email and other virtual activities would drastically reduce the number of opportunities for terrorists to get attention by striking at us with weapons of mass destruction.

It would also create a much deadlier foe for the terrorists as law enforcement, military and intelligence activities become more powerful and focused on the task of finding and arresting terrorists.

strategypage.com/militaryforums/22-132.aspx

From the Taiwan Strait to the Strait of Malacca, security concerns are growing around the South China Sea. While the Bush Administration sees a resurgent Chinese military threat across the Taiwan Strait and a terrorist threat in the Strait of Malacca, many countries between the Straits are more concerned about security for their maritime resources from the threats of competitors, traffickers, poachers, and pirates.

Security Concerns in the South China Sea

Several recent statements and appointments highlight the current Bush administration view of China's threat to Taiwan. Porter Goss, director of the U.S. Central Intelligence Agency, warned that improved Chinese capabilities not only threaten Taiwan but also U.S. forces in the (western Pacific) region. U.S. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld worried that the Chinese navy was building some amphibious landing ships for possible use across the Taiwan Strait…………


How to Eliminate Terrorism in the South China Sea?

At the other end of the South China Sea, American officials are primarily concerned by the terrorist threat to the vital sea lane of the Strait of Malacca. Admiral Thomas Fargo, commander of U.S. forces in the Pacific, on a visit to Singapore and Malaysia last year warned that seaborne terrorism must be taken as seriously as attacks from the air, especially in the vital Malacca Strait shipping lane. Fargo noted that the Al-Qaeda-linked Jemaah Islamiyah (JI) terror group was a menace in the region. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld said he hoped U.S. forces would be hunting terrorists in the Strait of Malacca "pretty soon," as they were already doing with Filipino counter-terrorist troops in Mindanao in the Philippines.

To deal with these possible threats, the U.S. has started three major unilateral initiatives, the Container Security Initiative (CSI) the Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI), and the Regional Maritime Security Initiative (RMSI) directed specifically at the Strait of Malacca.

The Container Security Initiative (CSI), first proposed by the U.S. Customs service in January 2002, aims to identify "high-risk" containers and use technology to screen them according to U.S. specifications in the originating ports rather than in the destination ports in the U.S. The program -- compulsory inspection at the origin rather than the destination -- places an enormous financial and security burden on all ports that ship to the U.S. More than half of the top 20 container ports in the world are in or around the South China Sea.

In order to be approved as a CSI-port, a government must agree to allow U.S. Customs personnel to supervise the screening of containers bound for ports in the U.S., install screening equipment designed to detect illicit narcotics, as well as radiological, chemical, biological or conventional weapons, submit a detailed electronic manifest to U.S. Customs 24 hours in advance of its projected arrival in the U.S., and upgrade to new "smart container" technologies and designs for U.S.-bound shipping traffic.

Remarkably, despite numerous difficulties of implementation, in the first year after the announcement of the CSI, 18 of the top 20 ports that export containers to the United States had complied.

In a similar move in December 2004, Australia declared a new 1000-nautical-mile maritime security zone in which all ships traveling to Australia will be required to provide details on their journey and cargo. All vessels coming within a 200-nautical-mile limit of the Australian coast will be required to give extra details on cargo, ports visited, location, course, speed and intended port of arrival. Indonesian authorities objected to the unilateral measure, saying it infringed on Indonesian waters and violated freedom of navigation. As other countries extend their security zones, complications are bound to arise.

The Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI) aims to seize "shipments of weapons of mass destruction (WMD) and missile-related equipment and technologies" -- by sea or air -- before they fall into the hands of terrorist organizations or their state sponsors. Participating states agree to share information related to suspected proliferation activities, interdict the transshipment of WMD, and strengthen national and international laws to allow the "aggressive interdiction of vessels suspected of carrying weapons of mass destruction." The PSI Interdiction Principles further state that countries have a commitment to board suspicious vessels sailing within their national waters, to board suspicious vessels flying their own flag in international waters, and to "seriously consider providing consent" to boardings of their own flagged vessels by other PSI states.

So far, many states have gone along with CSI and PSI. However, the high costs of compliance evoke images of colonialism and hegemony. The stationing of U.S. Customs officials in the sovereign ports of foreign states might be seen as intrusive. PSI and CSI may also limit the rights of commercial vessels operating internationally to remain free from arbitrary search and seizure. The initiatives are directed exclusively toward safeguarding U.S.-bound shipping, not Asia-bound trade or intra-Asian trade. Further, they exclude WMD and related shipments by the U.S. to its allies. On the whole, CSI and PSI lack transparency, reciprocity, and accountability; they are unilateral U.S. measures prompted by the 9/11 attacks.

It may be that this is the necessary cost of increased maritime security in the twenty-first century. If many countries are willing to accept this type of non-consultative and unilaterally-driven process, that would indicate a very significant change in the way international regulations are framed and implemented. It would constitute a major shift from negotiated multilateralism of the post-war system to cooperative unilateralism under post-Cold War American hegemony.

In sharp contrast with the CSI and PSI, the Regional Maritime Security Initiative (RMSI) proposed by the United States, has caused much consternation around the South China Sea. Adm. Thomas B. Fargo, Commander of the U.S. Pacific Command, introduced the RMSI in a speech to the U.S. Congress on March 31, 2004. He remarked that "we're looking at things like high speed vessels, putting Special Operations Forces on high-speed vessels so that we can use boats that might be incorporated with these vessels to conduct effective interdiction in, once again, these sea lines of communications where terrorists are known to move about and transmit throughout the region." [3]

Malaysia and Indonesia immediately and vehemently rejected the idea of U.S. troops in the area, emphasizing their own capabilities in tackling the threat. Malaysian Defense Minister Najib Razak emphasized that the presence of foreign forces in the region or "interdiction" operations in the Strait would not be tolerated. [4]

The U.S. began almost immediately to backpedal on the idea. U.S. Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld and U.S. Navy Pacific Fleet Commander Adm. Walter F. Doran stated that Adm. Fargo's earlier comments on the RMSI had been "misreported," the plan was still very much in its early stages, and it would focus primarily on intelligence sharing not a U.S. troop presence.

Another effort to improve shipping safety and security -- the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (ISPS) -- came into effect in July 2004. Initiated by the UN's International Maritime Organization, the ISPS is more comprehensive and provides more transparency and multilateral participation than the RMSI.

http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cf...=17&ItemID=7632

Senior FPDA Officials Observe Maritime Interdiction Operation At Sea

Sept 2006
Armed forces of the Five Power Defence Arrangements (FPDA) member countries carried out a maritime interdiction operation (MIOPS) serial as part of the major FPDA joint exercise Bersama Padu 2006. The exercise is being conducted in Peninsular Malaysia and Singapore, as well as the South China Sea. The FPDA forces cooperated with government agencies, such as Singapore's Police Coast Guard (PCG), Maritime & Port Authority (MPA), Immigration & Checkpoints Authority (ICA) and Singapore Customs (SC) to locate and interdict two simulated target vessels.

Maritime security serials dealing with non-conventional threat scenarios are an important component of FPDA exercises. At the 6th FPDA Defence Ministers' Meeting in June this year, the FPDA Defence Ministers had expressed satisfaction with the development of the FPDA in its co-operation against non-conventional threats, especially in maritime security. The Defence Ministers also recognised that the scope of FPDA exercises had widened to include the participation of other government departments.

The exercise was observed by members of the FPDA Consultative Council. They included Defence Attache (Australia), CAPT Mark Jerret; Deputy Director Policy, (MINDEF, Malaysia) Mr D. Rajayah; High Commissioner of New Zealand, HE Dr Richard Grant; Permanent Secretary (Defence) (Singapore) Mr Chiang Chie Foo; and Defence Attache (UK) GPCAPT Tim Brewer.


http://www.mindef.gov.sg/imindef/news_and_...t.html?Status=1

Judging Terrorist Capability

This commentary first appeared in the Monterey County Herald on August 11, 2006.
BRUSSELS, Belgium - Here in Europe, people woke Thursday to the gradually unfolding news that police had thwarted a terrorist plot to plant explosive devices aboard flights from London's Heathrow airport to the United States.
Americans had a rather ruder awakening, learning over morning coffee even fuller details of this latest terrorist threat and news that the national alert status had been heightened to its highest level -- "Red" (severe) -- for flights from Britain to the United States, and to the second highest level -- "Orange" (high) -- for all other civilian domestic and international flights.
As of this writing, details of the bomb plot that closed the world's busiest single-runway airport to incoming flights, throwing it into chaos, are still emerging.
According to early reports, planes from three U.S. airlines -- United, American and Continental -- were to be the intended targets. British authorities have detained more than 20 suspects and are carrying out follow-up searches. Meanwhile, British authorities also raised their national threat level to its highest level -- Critical -- "indicating that an attack is expected imminently."
While the number, destination and timing of the attacks are still under investigation, some reports say that a series of three terrorist strikes were being planned, each targeting three aircraft. The nature of security countermeasures indicate that the individual components of these devices (which may have used liquid explosive charges) were to be smuggled aboard in individual carry-on luggage, with the bombs being assembled and detonated when the aircraft were airborne.
If these reports are accurate, the plot could potentially have resulted in more casualties than the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks on America in 2001. This is a sobering consideration, as are reports that many of those arrested are said to be British citizens. As with the July 7, 2005, attacks in London, this highlights the home-grown aspect of the terrorist threat, even as the disruption caused by Thursday's alert and the nature of the alleged plot and its targets emphasizes its international dimension.
Propaganda-wise, the apparent breath of the would-be bombers' vision will resonate more deeply with their supporters than the fact that their plot appears to have been foiled. Moreover, even a foiled terrorist attack can cost dearly.
It is comforting that thus far, the cost has been relatively low (more an inconvenience than a loss of blood and treasure) compared to what cost would have been incurred had the terrorists been successful. But the physiological and economic costs of Thursday's events will not be insignificant.
While it is still too early to gauge the long-term fears these events will have invoked among the public, the economic fallout has already begun to manifest itself: share prices in the airline and travel industry are falling. Even if passenger and shareholder confidence bounces back quickly, the costs of the security response, flight delays and any eventual compensation to travelers shows that, for the terrorists, their modus operandi retains a healthy cost/benefit ratio.
Thursday's events also underline the international dimension of the terrorist threat. Even if all the Heathrow plotters turn out to be British -- an extremely worrying development for that country and all others with similarly susceptible citizens -- they will doubtless have been motivated and inspired by events and individuals far from Britain.
Moreover, the fact that major airports like Heathrow are regional and global chokepoints that are as vulnerable to the credible threat of terrorist attack as to actual terrorist attack serves to remind us of the international nature of much of today's terrorism. This is true even if those perpetrating the attacks often turn out to be homegrown. Not all terrorism is international, but the line between international terrorism and its domestic variant is increasingly blurred.
As the fifth anniversary of the Sept. 11 attacks draws near, the degree to which the Heathrow plot is verifiably demonstrated to have been a credible one, and just how likely it was to succeed, will be crucial in assessing terrorist capabilities.
Their intent is not in question.

http://www.cdi.org/program/document.cfm?Do..._page=index.cfm

IED Developments

September 10, 2006: Some interesting developments in the IED (Improvised Explosive Device) world. In Afghanistan, the Taliban have been booby-trapping corpses. This is an old trick, of course, but not previously seen much coming from Islamic terrorists. That's because it represents a violation of the "sanctity" of the deceased. That is something Moslems seem to take very seriously. Attempts to use such tactics to discredit the enemy in the Western or Moslem media have been unsuccessful. If Coalition troops booby trap a body, that would be news. But the media goes on the assumption that you must expect that sort of thing from the enemy, and that's not news.

Meanwhile, in Iraq, the use of electronic means to detonate IEDs has been dropping off sharply. This is probably a result of increasing sophisticated Coalition technologies that can find, jam, or prematurely detonate electronically controlled IEDs. Greater reliance is being placed on command-detonated IEDs and on "victim-initiated" detonation.

strategypage.com/htmw/htweap/articles/20060910.aspx?comments=Y

Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing

Since September 11, 2001, counter-terror operations have increased enormously. During the rush to shut down Islamic terrorists, wherever they could be found, several non-Islamic terrorist support networks were discovered. These were operating among immigrant populations in Europe and North America.

It was known that Islamic terrorists had solicited money from Moslem migrants, living in West Europe and North America, to support terrorist operations. These Moslems provided money, sanctuary and manpower. The money was actually the most dangerous form of support, because all terrorist attacks are powered by cash. No, the terrorists aren't well paid, but they are paid. Expenses have to be covered. This includes things like travel, false documents, food and lodging, weapons and bribes to officials. Many Moslems do not approve of terrorism, so charity organizations were established, and collected money to help the poor folks back in the old country. Depending on the charity, some, or all, of the money went to supporting terrorist activities.



About the FATF
Since its creation the FATF has spearheaded the effort to adopt and implement measures designed to counter the use of the financial system by criminals. It established a series of Recommendations in 1990, revised in 1996 and in 2003 to ensure that they remain up to date and relevant to the evolving threat of money laundering, that set out the basic framework for anti-money laundering efforts and are intended to be of universal application.
In response to mounting concern over money laundering, the Financial Action Task Force on Money Laundering (FATF) was established by the G-7 Summit that was held in Paris in 1989. Recognising the threat posed to the banking system and to financial institutions, the G-7 Heads of State or Government and President of the European Commission convened the Task Force from the G-7 member States, the European Commission, and eight other countries.
The Task Force was given the responsibility of examining money laundering techniques and trends, reviewing the action which had already been taken at a national or international level, and setting out the measures that still needed to be taken to combat money laundering. In April 1990, less than one year after its creation, the FATF issued a report containing a set of Forty Recommendations, which provide a comprehensive plan of action needed to fight against money laundering.
During 1991 and 1992, the FATF expanded its membership from the original 16 to 28 members. Since then FATF has continued to examine the methods used to launder criminal proceeds and has completed two rounds of mutual evaluations of its member countries and jurisdictions. It has also updated the Forty Recommendations to reflect the changes which have occurred in money laundering and has sought to encourage other countries around the world to adopt anti-money laundering measures.


FATF Assesses the United States’ System for Combating Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing
http://www.fatf-gafi.org/document/23/0,234...1_1_1_1,00.html

The Financial Action Task Force (FATF) and the Asia Pacific Group (APG) have jointly assessed the United States’ anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing (AML/CFT) standards. Among the major findings of the report were:
• The United States has a comprehensive legal and institutional framework for investigating and prosecuting money laundering and terrorist financing offenses.
• The United States vigorously pursues, seizes and confiscates the assets of criminals involved in money-laundering and terrorist financing.
• The United States has an effective regulatory and supervisory framework for monitoring compliance with AML/CFT measures and has imposed severe financial penalties on financial institutions that do not comply with the measures.
• Customer identification requirements apply to most types of financial institutions; however, these could be strengthened, particularly in relation to the identification of beneficial owners.
• AML/CFT measures presently apply to a broad range of financial institutions; however, the FATF recommends that comprehensive AML/CFT measures should also apply to a wider range of non-financial businesses and professions.
• Company formation procedures and reporting requirements are such that the information on beneficial ownership of legal persons may not, in most instances, be adequate, accurate or available on a timely basis.


A summary of the major findings of the report, as well as the entire assessment report, was released today. Click here to download a copy of the summary. Click here to download a copy of the full assessment report. Click here to download a copy of the annexes to the report. The United States is the ninth country to be examined in the third series of FATF mutual evaluations of its members.

Vehicle "Fingerprints"

Stopping terrorists involves first detecting them. To this end, the U.S. Department of Defense has developed a system that identifies vehicles via a "fingerprint", and then tracks the use of each vehicle as it moves past a network of video cameras. The unique "fingerprint" for each vehicle is the color, size and number of wheels on it. This information is collected by video cameras.
The digital image is examined by the identifying software, and the database is checked to see if the vehicle has been seen before. Naturally, the cameras track vehicles by time and location.
These CZTS (Combat Zones That See) systems are installed at all U.S. bases in Iraq. Attempts to fool the system are very difficult (and the CZTS developers aren't discussing the issue any further, for obvious reasons). CZTS gives troops the same type of information police in the United States have had since the introduction of automatic electronic payment of tolls on bridges and highways.

strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20060713.aspx

The Smuggled Component Tactic

Islamic terrorists are increasingly getting past security systems by smuggling bomb components into the target area, assembling the bomb "inside" and then planting and detonating the device inside a seemingly secure area. This has been happening in Iraq, where terrorists get jobs on bases, smuggle in bomb components and then plant them. So far, most of these attacks have been stymied when the bomber got caught assembling or planting the bomb. Same thing in Israel, where terrorists are smuggling bomb components into Israel, instead of trying to get people through, or around, Israeli while carrying a bomb. This approach does, however, put more key terrorist personnel at risk of capture. Assembling the bomb is no trivial task. This requires someone who knows what they are doing. Errors can be fatal, and loud. But this new technique does make it more difficult to keep the bombers out, even if puts the entire bomb making and planting team into a sensitive, and well guarded, area.

strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20060425.aspx

Another Terrorist Trap Exposed

September 5, 2006: Another valuable intel capability has been weakened by exposure in the media. But this time, it wasn't the New York Times, but several Israeli newspapers, covering the escapades of an Israeli Internet entrepreneur, and his flight from prosecution in the United States for stock fraud, that did the damage. The story was all about how a shady Israeli private investigator claimed to have traced the fugitive, Jacob Alexander, via a VOIP phone call, to Sri Lanka.

This was big news for many terrorists, because they generally believed that VOIP (Voice Over Internet Protocol), or phone calls made over the Internet, were not traceable. The calls are also encrypted, with a cipher that is believed very hard to decode. The VOIP geeks know that VOIP calls can be traced, and the encryption geeks continue to discuss how easy it would be (especially if you were the NSA) to decrypt those calls. But until this recent flurry of publicity over the hunt for Jacob Alexander, the general public (which includes many Islamic terrorists) were unaware of the situation. Now Islamic terrorists may use VOIP less, or perhaps not at all. That's bad news for intelligence agencies, who have had a lot of success collecting information about Islamic terrorists via the Internet.

Mr. Alexander is still at large.
strategypage.com/htmw/htintel/articles/20060905.aspx?comments=Y

National Strategy for Combating Terrorism

September 2006
Strategy for Winning the War on Terror
Long-term approach: Advancing effective democracy
The long-term solution for winning the War on Terror is the advancement of freedom and human dignity through effective democracy. Elections are the most visible sign of a free society and can play a critical role in advancing effective democracy. But elections alone are not enough. Effective democracies honor and uphold basic human rights, including freedom of religion, conscience, speech, assembly, association, and press. They are responsive to their citizens, submitting to the will of the people. Effective democracies exercise effective sovereignty and maintain order within their own borders, address causes of conflict peacefully, protect independent and impartial systems of justice, punish crime, embrace the rule of law, and resist corruption. Effective democracies also limit the reach of government, protecting the institutions of civil society. In effective democracies, freedom is indivisible. They are the long-term antidote to the ideology of terrorism today. This is the battle of ideas.
To wage the battle of ideas effectively, we must recognize what does and does not give rise to terrorism:
„X Terrorism is not the inevitable by-product of poverty. Many of the September 11 hijackers were from middle-class backgrounds, and many terrorist leaders, like bin Laden, are from privileged upbringings.
„X Terrorism is not simply a result of hostility to U.S. policy in Iraq. The United States was attacked on September 11 and many years earlier, well before we toppled the Saddam Hussein regime. Moreover, countries that did not participate in Coalition efforts in Iraq have not been spared from terror attacks.
„X Terrorism is not simply a result of Israeli-Palestinian issues. Al-Qaida plotting for the September 11 attacks began in the 1990s, during an active period in the peace process.
„X Terrorism is not simply a response to our efforts to prevent terror attacks. The al-Qaida network targeted the United States long before the United States targeted al-Qaida. Indeed, the terrorists are emboldened more by perceptions of weakness than by demonstrations of resolve. Terrorists lure recruits by telling them that we are decadent, easily intimidated, and will retreat if attacked.
The terrorism we confront today springs from:
„X Political alienation.
Transnational terrorists are recruited from populations with no voice in their own government and see no legitimate way to promote change in their own country. Without a stake in the existing order, they are vulnerable to manipulation by those who advocate a perverse political vision based on violence and destruction.
„X Grievances that can be blamed on others.
The failures the terrorists feel and see are blamed both on others and on perceived injustices from the recent or sometimes distant past. The terrorists¡¦ rhetoric keeps wounds associated with this past fresh and raw, a potent motivation for revenge and terror.
„X Subcultures of conspiracy and misinformation.
Terrorists recruit more effectively from populations whose information about the world is contaminated by falsehoods and corrupted by conspiracy theories. The distortions keep alive grievances and filter out facts that would challenge popular prejudices and self-serving propaganda.
„X An ideology that justifies murder.
Terrorism ultimately depends upon the appeal of an ideology that excuses or even glorifies the deliberate killing of innocents. Islam has been twisted and made to serve an evil end, as in other times and places other religions have been similarly abused.
Defeating terrorism in the long run requires that each of these factors be addressed. Effective democracy provides a counter to each, diminishing the underlying conditions terrorists seek to exploit.
„X In place of alienation, democracy offers an ownership stake in society, a chance to shape one¡¦s own future.
„X In place of festering grievances, democracy offers the rule of law, the peaceful resolution of disputes, and the habits of advancing interests through compromise.
„X In place of a culture of conspiracy and misinformation, democracy offers freedom of speech, independent media, and the marketplace of ideas, which can expose and discredit falsehoods, prejudices, and dishonest propaganda.
„X In place of an ideology that justifies murder, democracy offers a respect for human dignity that abhors the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians.
Democracy is the antithesis of terrorist tyranny, which is why the terrorists denounce it and are willing to kill the innocent to stop it. Democracy is based on empowerment, while the terrorists¡¦ ideology is based on enslavement. Democracies expand the freedom of their citizens, while the terrorists seek to impose a single set of narrow beliefs. Democracy sees individuals as equal in worth and dignity, having an inherent potential to create, govern themselves, and exercise basic freedoms of speech and conscience. The terrorists see individuals as objects to be exploited, and then to be ruled and oppressed.
Democracies are not immune to terrorism. In some democracies, some ethnic or religious groups are unable or unwilling to grasp the benefits of freedom otherwise available in the society. Such groups can evidence the same alienation and despair that the transnational terrorists exploit in undemocratic states. This accounts for the emergence in democratic societies of homegrown terrorists ¡V even among second- and third-generation citizens. Even in these cases, the long-term solution remains deepening the reach of democracy so that all citizens enjoy its benefits. We will continue to guard against the emergence of homegrown terrorists within our own Homeland as well.
The strategy to counter the lies behind the terrorists¡¦ ideology and deny them future recruits must empower the very people the terrorists most want to exploit: the faithful followers of Islam. We will continue to support political reforms that empower peaceful Muslims to practice and interpret their faith. We will work to undermine the ideological underpinnings of violent Islamic extremism and gain the support of non-violent Muslims around the world. The most vital work will be done within the Islamic world itself, and Jordan, Morocco, and Indonesia, among others, have begun to make important strides in this effort. Responsible Islamic leaders need to denounce an ideology that distorts and exploits Islam to justify the murder of innocent people and defiles a proud religion.
Many of the Muslim faith are already making this commitment at great personal risk. They realize they are a target of this ideology of terror. Everywhere we have joined in the fight against terrorism, Muslim allies have stood beside us, becoming partners in this vital cause. They know the stakes ¡V the survival of their own liberty, the future of their own region, the justice and humanity of their own traditions ¡V and the United States is proud to stand beside them. Not only will we continue to support the efforts of our Muslim partners overseas to reject violent extremism, we will continue to engage with and strengthen the efforts of Muslims within the United States as well. Through outreach programs and public diplomacy we will reveal the terrorists¡¦ violent extremist ideology for what it is ¡V a form of totalitarianism following in the path of fascism and Nazism.

Over the short term: Four priorities of action
The advance of freedom, opportunity, and human dignity through democracy is the long-term solution to the transnational terror movement of today. To create the space and time for this long-term solution to take root, we are operating along four priorities of action in the short term.
Prevent attacks by terrorist networks.
A government has no higher obligation than to protect the lives and livelihoods of its citizens. The hard core among our terrorist enemies cannot be reformed or deterred; they will be tracked down, captured, or killed. They will be cut off from the network of individuals, institutions, and other resources they depend on for support and that facilitate their activities. The network, in turn, will be deterred, disrupted, and disabled. Working with committed partners across the globe, we continue to use a broad range of tools at home and abroad to take the fight to the terrorists, deny them entry to the United States, hinder their movement across international borders, and establish protective measures to further reduce our vulnerability to attack.
„X Attack terrorists and their capacity to operate.
The United States and our partners continue to take active and effective measures against our primary terrorist enemies and certain other violent extremist groups that also pose a serious and continuing threat. We are attacking these terrorists and their capacity to operate effectively at home and abroad. Specifically, through the use of all elements of national power, we are denying or neutralizing what our terrorist enemies need to operate and survive:
„X Leaders, who provide the vision that followers strive to realize. They also offer the necessary direction, discipline, and motivation for accomplishing a given goal or task. Most terrorist organizations have a central figure who embodies the cause, in addition to several operational leaders and managers who provide guidance on a functional, regional, or local basis. The loss of a leader can degrade a group¡¦s cohesiveness and in some cases may trigger its collapse. Other terrorist groups adapt by promoting experienced cadre or decentralizing their command structures, making our challenge in neutralizing terrorist leaders even greater.
„X Foot soldiers, which include the operatives, facilitators, and trainers in a terrorist network. They are the lifeblood of a terrorist group ¡V they make it run. Technology and globalization have enhanced the ability of groups to recruit foot soldiers to their cause, including well-educated recruits. We and our partners will not only continue to capture and kill foot soldiers, but will work to halt the influx of recruits into terrorist organizations as well. Without a continuing supply of personnel to facilitate and carry out attacks, these groups ultimately will cease to operate.
„X Weapons, the tools of terrorists and the means by which they murder to advance their cause. Terrorists exploit many avenues to develop and acquire weapons, including through state sponsors, theft or capture, and black market purchases. Our enemies employ existing technology ¡V explosives, small arms, missiles and other devices ¡V in both conventional and unconventional ways to terrorize and achieve mass effects. They also use non-weapon technologies as weapons, such as the airplanes on September 11. Our greatest and gravest concern, however, is WMD in the hands of terrorists. Preventing their acquisition and the dire consequences of their use is a key priority of this strategy.
„X Funds, which provide the fungible, easily transportable means to secure all other forms of material support necessary to the survival and operation of terrorist organizations. Our enemies raise funds through a variety of means, including soliciting contributions from supporters; operating businesses, NGOs, and charitable fronts; and engaging in criminal activity such as fraud, extortion, and kidnapping for ransom. They transfer funds through several mechanisms, including the formal banking system, wire transfers, debit or "smart" cards, cash couriers, and hawalas, which are alternative remittance systems based on trust. Effective disruption of funding sources and interdiction of transfer mechanisms can help our partners and us to starve terrorist networks of the material support they require.
„X Communications, which allow terrorists the ability to receive, store, manipulate, and exchange information. The methods by which terrorists communicate are numerous and varied. Our enemies rely on couriers and face-to-face contacts with associates and tend to use what is accessible in their local areas as well as what they can afford. They also use today¡¦s technologies with increasing acumen and sophistication. This is especially true with the Internet, which they exploit to create and disseminate propaganda, recruit new members, raise funds and other material resources, provide instruction on weapons and tactics, and plan operations. Without a communications ability, terrorist groups cannot effectively organize operations, execute attacks, or spread their ideology. We and our partners will continue to target the communication nodes of our enemy.
„X Propaganda operations, which are used by terrorists to justify violent action as well as inspire individuals to support or join the movement. The ability of terrorists to exploit the Internet and 24/7 worldwide media coverage allows them to bolster their prominence as well as feed a steady diet of radical ideology, twisted images, and conspiracy theories to potential recruits in all corners of the globe. Besides a global reach, these technologies allow terrorists to propagate their message quickly, often before an effective counter to terrorist messages can be coordinated and distributed. These are force multipliers for our enemy.

„X Deny terrorists entry to the United States and disrupt their travel internationally.
Denying our enemies the tools to travel internationally and across and within our borders significantly impedes their mobility and can inhibit their effectiveness. They rely on illicit networks to facilitate travel and often obtain false identification documents through theft or in-house forgery operations. We will continue to enhance the security of the American people through a layered system of protections along our borders, at our ports, on our roadways and railways, in our skies, and with our international partners. We will continue to develop and enhance security practices and technologies to reduce vulnerabilities in the dynamic transportation network, inhibit terrorists from crossing U.S. borders, and detect and prevent terrorist travel within the United States. Our efforts will include improving all aspects of aviation security; promoting secure travel and identity documents; disrupting travel facilitation networks; improving border security and visa screening; and building international capacity and improving international information exchange to secure travel and combat terrorist travel. Our National Strategy to Combat Terrorist Travel and our National Strategy for Maritime Security will help guide our efforts.
„X Defend potential targets of attack.
Our enemies are opportunistic, exploiting vulnerabilities and seeking alternatives to those targets with increased security measures. The targeting trend since at least September 11 has been away from hardened sites, such as official government facilities with formidable security, and toward softer targets ¡V schools, restaurants, places of worship, and nodes of public transportation ¡V where innocent civilians gather and which are not always well secured. Specific targets vary, but they tend to be symbolic and often selected because they will produce mass casualties, economic damage, or both.

While it is impossible to protect completely all potential targets all the time, we can deter and disrupt attacks, as well as mitigate the effects of those that do occur, through strategic security improvements at sites both at home and overseas. Among our most important defensive efforts is the protection of critical infrastructures and key resources ¡V sectors such as energy, food and agriculture, water, telecommunications, public health, transportation, the defense industrial base, government facilities, postal and shipping, the chemical industry, emergency services, monuments and icons, information technology, dams, commercial facilities, banking and finance, and nuclear reactors, materials, and waste. These are systems and assets so vital that their destruction or incapacitation would have a debilitating effect on the security of our Nation. We will also continue to protect various assets such as historical attractions or certain high-profile events whose destruction or attack would not necessarily debilitate our national security but could damage the morale and confidence of the American people. Beyond the Homeland, we will continue to protect and defend U.S. citizens, diplomatic missions, and military facilities overseas, as well as work with our partners to strengthen their ability to protect their populations and critical infrastructures.
Deny WMD to rogue states and terrorist allies who seek to use them.
Weapons of mass destruction in the hands of terrorists is one of the gravest threats we face. We have taken aggressive efforts to deny terrorists access to WMD-related materials, equipment, and expertise, but we will enhance these activities through an integrated effort at all levels of government and with the private sector and our foreign partners to stay ahead of this dynamic and evolving threat. In July 2006, the United States and Russia launched the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism to establish an international framework to enhance cooperation, build capacity, and act to combat the global threat of nuclear terrorism. This initiative will help drive international focus and action to ensure the international community is doing everything possible to prevent nuclear weapons, materials, and knowledge from reaching the hands of terrorists.
With regard to our own efforts, our comprehensive approach for addressing WMD terrorism hinges on six objectives, and we will work across all objectives simultaneously to maximize our ability to eliminate the threat.
„X Determine terrorists¡¦ intentions, capabilities, and plans to develop or acquire WMD.
We need to understand and assess the credibility of threat reporting and provide technical assessments of terrorists¡¦ WMD capabilities.
„X Deny terrorists access to the materials, expertise, and other enabling capabilities required to develop WMD.
We have an aggressive, global approach to deny our enemies access to WMD-related materials (with a particular focus on weapons-usable fissile materials), fabrication expertise, methods of transport, sources of funds, and other capabilities that facilitate the execution of a WMD attack. In addition to building upon existing initiatives to secure materials, we are developing innovative approaches that blend classic counterproliferation, nonproliferation, and counterterrorism efforts.
„X Deter terrorists from employing WMD.
A new deterrence calculus combines the need to deter terrorists and supporters from contemplating a WMD attack and, failing that, to dissuade them from actually conducting an attack. Traditional threats may not work because terrorists show a wanton disregard for the lives of innocents and in some cases for their own lives. We require a range of deterrence strategies that are tailored to the situation and the adversary. We will make clear that terrorists and those who aid or sponsor a WMD attack would face the prospect of an overwhelming response to any use of such weapons. We will seek to dissuade attacks by improving our ability to mitigate the effects of a terrorist attack involving WMD ¡V to limit or prevent large-scale casualties, economic disruption, or panic. Finally, we will ensure that our capacity to determine the source of any attack is well-known, and that our determination to respond overwhelmingly to any attack is never in doubt.
„X Detect and disrupt terrorists¡¦ attempted movement of WMD-related materials, weapons, and personnel.
We will expand our global capability for detecting illicit materials, weapons, and personnel transiting abroad or heading for the United States or U.S. interests overseas. We will use our global partnerships, international agreements, and ongoing border security and interdiction efforts. We also will continue to work with countries to enact and enforce strict penalties for WMD trafficking and other suspect WMD-related activities.
„X Prevent and respond to a WMD-related terrorist attack.
Once the possibility of a WMD attack against the United States has been detected, we will seek to contain, interdict, and eliminate the threat. We will continue to develop requisite capabilities to eliminate the possibility of a WMD operation and to prevent a possible follow-on attack. We will prepare ourselves for possible WMD incidents by developing capabilities to manage the range of consequences that may result from such an attack against the United States or our interests around the world.
„X Define the nature and source of a terrorist-employed WMD device. Should a WMD terrorist attack occur, the rapid identification of the source and perpetrator of an attack will enable our response efforts and may be critical in disrupting follow-on attacks. We will develop the capability to assign responsibility for the intended or actual use of WMD via accurate attribution ¡V the rapid fusion of technical forensic data with intelligence and law enforcement information.
Deny terrorists the support and sanctuary of rogue states. The United States and its allies and partners in the War on Terror make no distinction between those who commit acts of terror and those who support and harbor terrorists. Any government that chooses to be an ally of terror has chosen to be an enemy of freedom, justice, and peace. The world will hold those regimes to account. To break the bonds between rogue states and our terrorist enemies, we will work to disrupt the flow of resources from states to terrorists while simultaneously working to end state sponsorship of terrorism.
„X End state sponsorship of terrorism.
State sponsors are a critical resource for our terrorist enemies, often providing funds, weapons, training, safe passage, and sanctuary. Some of these countries have developed or have the capability to develop WMD and other destabilizing technologies that could fall into the hands of terrorists. The United States currently designates five state sponsors of terrorism: Iran, Syria, Sudan, North Korea, and Cuba. We will maintain sanctions against them and promote their international isolation until they end their support for terrorists, including the provision of sanctuary. To further isolate these regimes and persuade other states not to sponsor terror, we will use a range of tools and efforts to delegitimate terrorism as an instrument of statecraft. Any act of international terrorism, whether committed by a state or individual, is reprehensible, a threat to international peace and security, and should be unequivocally and uniformly rejected. Similarly, states that harbor and assist terrorists are as guilty as the terrorists, and they will be held to account.

Iran remains the most active state sponsor of international terrorism. Through its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps and Ministry of Intelligence and Security, the regime in Tehran plans terrorist operations and supports groups such as Lebanese Hizballah, Hamas, and Palestine Islamic Jihad (PIJ). Iran also remains unwilling to account for and bring to justice senior al-Qaida members it detained in 2003. Most troubling is the potential WMD-terrorism nexus that emanates from Tehran. Syria also is a significant state sponsor of terrorism and thus a priority for concern. The regime in Damascus supports and provides haven to Hizballah, Hamas, and PIJ. We will continue to stand with the people of Iran and Syria against the regimes that oppress them at home and sponsor terror abroad.

While Iranian and Syrian terrorist activities are especially worrisome, we are pressing all state sponsors to take the steps that are required to have state sponsorship designation rescinded. Each case is unique, and our approach to each will be tailored accordingly. Moreover, we never foreclose future membership in the coalition against tyranny and terror. The designation of Iraq as a state sponsor was rescinded in 2004 as it transitioned to democracy, ceased its terrorist support, and became an ally in the War on Terror. Similarly, the United States in June 2006 rescinded the designation of Libya, which has renounced terrorism and since September 11 has provided excellent cooperation to the United States and other members of the international community in response to the new global threats we face. Libya can serve as a model for states who wish to rejoin the community of nations by rejecting terror.
„X Disrupt the flow of resources from rogue states to terrorists.
Until we can eliminate state sponsorship of terror, we will disrupt and deny the flow of support from states to terrorists. We will continue to create and strengthen international will to interdict material support, akin to our efforts in the Proliferation Security Initiative ¡V a global effort to stop shipments of WMD, their delivery systems, and related material. We will build international cooperation to financially isolate rogue states and their terrorist proxies. We also will continue to expose the vehicles and fronts that states use to support their terrorist surrogates.
Deny terrorists control of any nation they would use as a base and launching pad for terror. Our terrorist enemies are striving to claim a strategic country as a haven for terror. From this base, they could destabilize the Middle East and strike America and other free nations with ever-increasing violence. This we can never allow. Our enemies had established a sanctuary in Afghanistan prior to Operation Enduring Freedom, and today terrorists see Iraq as the central front of their fight against the United States. This is why success in helping the Afghan and Iraqi peoples forge effective democracies is vital. We will continue to prevent terrorists from exploiting ungoverned or under-governed areas as safehavens ¡V secure spaces that allow our enemies to plan, organize, train, and prepare for operations. Ultimately, we will eliminate these havens altogether.
„X Eliminate physical safehavens.
Physical sanctuaries can stretch across an entire sovereign state, be limited to specific ungoverned or ill-governed areas in an otherwise functioning state, or cross national borders. In some cases the government wants to exercise greater effective sovereignty over its lands and maintain control within its borders but lacks the necessary capacity. We will strengthen the capacity of such War on Terror partners to reclaim full control of their territory through effective police, border, and other security forces as well as functioning systems of justice. To further counter terrorist exploitation of under-governed lands, we will promote effective economic development to help ensure long-term stability and prosperity. In failing states or states emerging from conflict, the risks are significant. Spoilers can take advantage of instability to create conditions terrorists can exploit. We will continue to work with foreign partners and international organizations to help prevent conflict and respond to state failure by building foreign capacity for peace operations, reconstruction, and stabilization so that countries in transition can reach a sustainable path to peace, democracy, and prosperity. Where physical havens cross national boundaries, we will continue to work with the affected countries to help establish effective cross-border control. Yet some countries will be reluctant to fulfill their sovereign responsibilities to combat terrorist-related activities within their borders. In addition to cooperation and sustained diplomacy, we will continue to partner with the international community to persuade states to meet their obligations to combat terrorism and deny safehaven under U.N. Security Council Resolution 1373.
Yet safehavens are not just limited to geographic territories. They also can be non-physical or virtual, existing within legal, cyber, and financial systems.
„X Legal safehavens.
Some legal systems lack adequate procedural, substantive, and international assistance laws that enable effective investigation, prosecution, and extradition of terrorists. Such gaps offer a haven in which terrorists and their organizations can operate free from fear of prosecution. In the United States we have developed a domestic legal system that supports effective investigation and prosecution of terrorist activities while preserving individual privacy, the First Amendment rights of association, religious freedom, free speech, and other civil rights. We will continue to work with foreign partners to build their legal capacity to investigate, prosecute, and assist in the foreign prosecution of the full range of terrorist activities ¡V from provision of material support to conspiracy to operational planning to a completed act of terrorism.
„X Cyber safehavens.
The Internet provides an inexpensive, anonymous, geographically unbounded, and largely unregulated virtual haven for terrorists. Our enemies use the Internet to develop and disseminate propaganda, recruit new members, raise and transfer funds, train members on weapons use and tactics, and plan operations. Terrorist organizations can use virtual safehavens based anywhere in the world, regardless of where their members or operatives are located. Use of the Internet, however, creates opportunities for us to exploit. To counter terrorist use of the Internet as a virtual sanctuary, we will discredit terrorist propaganda by promoting truthful and peaceful messages. We will seek ultimately to deny the Internet to the terrorists as an effective safehaven for their propaganda, proselytizing, recruitment, fund-raising, training, and operational planning.
„X Financial safehavens.
Financial systems are used by terrorist organizations as a fiscal sanctuary in which to store and transfer the funds that support their survival and operations. Terrorist organizations use a variety of financial systems, including formal banking, wire transfers, debit and other stored value cards, online value storage and value transfer systems, the informal hawala system, and cash couriers. Terrorist organizations may be able to take advantage of such financial systems either as the result of willful complicity by financial institutions or as the result of poor oversight and monitoring practices. Domestically, we have hardened our financial systems against terrorist abuse by promulgating effective regulations, requiring financial institutions to report suspicious transactions, and building effective public/private partnerships. We will continue to work with foreign partners to ensure they develop and implement similar regulations, requirements, and partnerships with their financial institutions. We also will continue to use the domestic and international designation and targeted sanctions regimes provided by, among other mechanisms, Executive Order 13224, USA PATRIOT Act Section 311, and United Nations Security Council Resolution 1267 and subsequent resolutions. These tools identify and isolate those actors who form part of terrorist networks or facilitate their activities.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/lib...06_sectionv.htm

SCIENTISTS TEST HIJACK-PROOF PLANE
11.09.06

Hijack-proof airliners could soon become a reality
Tests have begun on a hijack-proof airliner that will steer clear of tall buildings if taken over by terrorists, according to defence giant BAE Systems.
Scientists are creating a computer system which spots suspicious passenger behaviour and can identify if an intruder is trying to take control.
It is part of a four-year 35.8 million euro (£25 million) project among European aviation specialists to thwart terrorists who have slipped through airport security.
Tests as part of the Security of Aircraft in the Future European Environment (SAFEE) project began in July.
They will continue through 2007 using simulators at Toulouse, Hamburg and Amsterdam.
In future passengers could be watched up by video and microphone sensors which are being developed by scientists at BAE Systems' Advanced Technology Centre in Filton, Bristol.
CCTV, fingerprint technology and sophisticated biometric systems are also being created to ensure that only bona fide pilots take to the skies.
More than 100 aviation experts from 31 companies, including a team from Reading University, are taking part in the project, which aims to make the aircraft the last barrier of defence against terror attacks.
BAE Systems is leading the development of a Threat Assessment and Response Management System (TARMS) designed to assemble data and recommend appropriate responses for the cockpit crew via a computer screen.
Dr Catherine Neary, the BAE Systems human factors specialist, said: "How the crew and ground staff respond to perceived threats is as important as detecting the threats themselves.
"BAE Systems is using its expertise in surveillance and security techniques from the defence arena to support this project aimed at protecting civilians."
A computer system designed to avoid collisions by changing the aircraft's trajectory to stop it being steered into a building or mountain is among the potential on-board devices.
There may also be a computer which, through a sophisticated biometric system, can defy a mid-flight takeover by spotting an intruder and guiding the aircraft to the nearest airport.
The SAFEE programme includes a chip-based system which will match passengers to luggage, a biometric camera at check-in to verify passenger identity, and an electronic nose to sniff out explosives before boarding.
There will also be a secure cockpit biometric system which will recognise crew members by their fingerprints and check if they are opening the cockpit under duress.
A data protection system to secure communications including conversations between cockpit and ground control is also being drawn up.
SAFEE coordinator Daniel Gaultier said: "You never reach zero level of threat, no risk, but if you equip planes with on-board electronics, it will make them very difficult to hijack."
The project runs until February 2008

http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article...lane/article.do

Rumors as a Weapon

One of the less well known counter-terror tactics used against Islamic terrorists, are scary rumors. Islamic terrorists like technology, and fear it. While the Islamic radicals want everyone to live under medieval social codes, they have nothing against climbing into the latest SUV, or using computers and high tech night vision gear. But, as a group, there are not a lot of geeks into Islamic terrorism. Moreover, Arabs have a thing about telling, creating, and believing outrageous rumors. Some counter-terror organizations have taken advantage of this by taking seemingly plausible, scary, and damaging (to terrorist operations) stories they find on the net, and spreading them among a large number of pro-terrorist web user groups. This is disinformation, and is an ancient technique. Ancient scriptures mention its use. The new wrinkle here is that the counter-terror organizations that are monitoring terrorist, or pro-terrorist web sites, chat rooms and listservs, note those bits of scary misinformation that seem to be the most popular. Sometimes calling in an Internet expert, the counter-terror people cook up even scarier variations on the initial rumor, and make sure all of them get spread around as much as possible. The Islamic terrorists and their fans have a hard time doing this, because many of the Islamic terrorist meeting spots on the web are kept secret, lest they be discovered by security officials and shut down. But most major Western intelligence agencies have an extensive list of these sites, a larger list than any Islamic terrorist has. New discoveries are shared among different countries, and when a particularly exploitable new rumor shows up, it gets a boost from the infidels.

The fighting in Iraq has generated a large number of fantastical tales, like the sunglasses that allow troops to see through clothing, and special radios that can turn an ordinary radio into a two-way device. Of late, the Islamic radicals have been coming up with fearful tales of web based software that was created and deployed by the CIA, to spy on Islamic radicals. Google has come in for a lot of attention, with the Google Toolbar being tagged as a tool of the devil (that is, Western counter-terror organizations.) Cell phones are becoming increasingly suspect. Many Islamic terrorists have a hard time telling the difference between different models, and have come to believe that all can be traced via GPS, or infected with computer viruses (only a few models can do either.)

The most Islamic terrorists, or sympathizers, believe these tall tales, the less effective the terrorists are. The full story of these disinformation efforts won't come out until long after the war on terror ends. But these techniques have been used again and again over the centuries. It's just another adaptation of old ideas to new technology.

strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/articles/20060421.aspx

Passengers' chat will be recorded to foil hijackers
By David Millward, Transport Correspondent
(Filed: 11/09/2006)

Air passengers could have their conversations and movements monitored as work intensifies to design the terrorist-proof aeroplane.
Researchers in Britain and Europe are looking at technology that would see a comprehensive network of microphones and cameras installed throughout the aircraft, including the lavatory, which would be linked to a computer.
This computer would be "trained" to pick up suspicious behaviour, said Catherine Neary, of Bae Systems, one of the British participants in a £24 million European Union project Safety of Aircraft in Future European Environment.
"It would pick passengers who are behaving oddly or in an unruly manner," she said. "They may appear nervous, or could be getting up while the plane is taxiing. If someone looks as if they are praying, the microphones would be able to tell if they were by picking up key words."
Eventually, the computer would be programmed to understand a variety of languages.
"Passengers are not being snooped on by humans, but by machines which will process the data, which would not be stored after the flight unless there is an incident," she said.
"There are likely to be cameras and microphones in the toilet, because that is where terrorists go to assemble bombs." The camera could also be trained to detect seemingly harmless items being left in aircraft lavatories that could later be assembled to make a lethal device.
"If people know they will be safer, they will be happy to accept the sensors, but we are considering the legal implications of this."
Bae Systems is co-operating with Reading University on the project designed to make the aircraft as secure as possible. "We are concentrating on onboard threat protection," said James Ferryman, a lecturer in computer science.
"We would be looking at ways in which people behave which would give rise to suspicion. It is a challenge to distinguish between situations – such as two children play fighting or someone being attacked."
The aviation industry is monitoring the project closely. ''We are always looking at new initiatives that would enhance security," a British Airways spokesman said. "BA already has CCTV which monitors activity outside the reinforced cockpit door. But we believe it is robust ground security which is the key to safety in the air."
Even before the aircraft takes off, passengers could be swept with an "electric nose" a hand-held device which could tell if they had had any contact with explosives.
Other initiatives include sophisticated biometric cameras at the check-in desk and departure gate. By comparing the iris, it could check that the passenger presenting him or herself at the airport was the one boarding the aircraft.
Work is already in hand to examine putting electronic chips on luggage that would match ones embedded in the boarding pass. They would make it easier to link passengers to their bags or, more importantly, find them when they are separated.

Telegraph.co.uk
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/mai...1/nplanes11.xml

How Terrorists Balance the Budget
Terrorists always need money, and the global Islamist terror movement is no different in this regard, from any other organization. Traditionally, terrorists have a variety of ways of securing funds. Subsidies from foreign governments are always popular. Although the collapse of the Soviet Union has dried up a lot of covert state subsidies to terrorists, there are still groups in Latin America and Africa that receive some money from foreign governments interesting in destabilizing their neighbors. For example, Pakistan regularly accuses India of financing Baluch and other rebel groups, which the Indians deny. At the same time, India claims that Pakistan finances Kashmiri and Islamist groups. Iran, Syria and Libya have long been accused with subsidizing Islamic terrorists.
Money can also be provided by sympathetic individuals abroad, such as NORAID support to the Irish Republican Army or various Islamic "charities" funding of Islamist groups. Since the onset of the "Global War on Terrorism," however, most governments have take steps to block private contributions. This does not mean that various insurgencies are left without funds. There are alternative sources of money.

Revolutionary "taxation" is popular. The terrorists impose "taxes" on the local populace. This can be very lucrative, especially if the local people support the insurgents. But it can also turn off the people, and thus can be counter-productive.
While some groups try robbery, taking down banks, armored cars, and so forth, this is actually not a reliable source of funds. After a couple of heists, the security forces begin "hardening" potential targets, making them much more difficult to rob. Drug dealing has proven popular, with groups as diverse as Colombia's FARC ("Fuerzas Armadas Revolucionarias de Colombia"), Afghanistan's Taliban, and both Catholic and Protestant extremists in Northern Ireland. Many groups also indulge in other forms of organized criminal activity, such as "protection" rackets, prostitution, smuggling, and so forth. Kidnapping can also be a good source of money, as folks will pay big bucks for their wives or children, but ultimately leads to a boom in the bodyguard industry.
One perennially favorite source of funds is counterfeiting. In Iraq, for example, counterfeiting gangs have been busted with some regularity. Counterfeiters were particularly active in late-2003, when the Coalition Provisional Authority introduced a new currency. At the time Iraqi exile leader Ahmad Chalabi was charged with involvement in one scam, but was not prosecuted. In a recent anti-terrorist sweep about $100,000 in bogus dinars were found, and there are probably lots more where they came from.
Advances in reproduction technology in recent decades have made counterfeiting a lot easier. As a result, many countries have been expanding their anti-counterfeiting laws to permit investigations of "suspicious" purchases of certain products, so that anti-terrorist police agencies can bust someone suspected of terrorist ties is he's been buying equipment or software that could be used for counterfeiting. In Sweden recently, such a bust occurred when an Arab resident of the country with ties to a known terrorist financing group was discovered making extensive purchases of reproduction equipment that could be used to counterfeit money or passports.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/ar...s/20060512.aspx

Pattern Analysis and Wire Transfers
Several American newspapers have revealed that bank wire transfers were being monitored for terrorist activity. Some Islamic terrorists apparently suspected as much. It's not public knowledge about how they knew this. They might have been tipped off by prior knowledge of the banking industry, or tips from people in the criminal underground who were aware of the risks inherent with using wire transfers. The risks are there because of pattern analysis. This is a collection of statistical tools that can reveal patterns in wire transfers. By using a database of organizations and individuals, known or suspected of terrorist involvement, pattern analysis will spotlight those who are involved in terrorist activities, or drug dealing, or whatever you are looking for. The wire transfer system that was being monitored moved over 11 million payments a day. Several terrorists are known to have been caught because of the wire transfer monitoring. However, because the media has made it widely known that this technique is being used, those terrorists who were using wire transfers, will switch to other forms of moving money. Actually, many terrorists have been doing that all along. Sending a courier with cash is slower and more dangerous, but it sure beats transmitting your activities to the police.

Alternative methods of transferring money are probably also being monitored, and will still be useful until some enterprising investigative journalist reveals that information to the terrorists.
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htterr/ar...s/20060626.aspx

Dealing with Multiple Terrorists: 21st Century AT/CT DoctrinePosted on


Not long ago I read through the book, Terror At Beslan: A Russian Tragedy with Lessons for America's Schools by John Giduck (review of the book here). The book so convinced me that we in law enforcement are training for the wrong threat (Active Shooter) that I doubted my own thought process. So, to double check my understanding, this past week I attended a presentation by John Giduck given at a conference in Washington, DC. What I found was that not only did I understand the book correctly, but the situation is worse than I actually perceived it. Understand that all of the following is provided thanks to Mr. John Giduck and his insights into the Beslan incident. I am merely reiterating his material and hope I got it all right out of my notes.

Through his presentation, Mr. Giduck explains the terrorist thought process and how the attacks / sieges they've committed have been motivated, planned and performed. Yes, I said "sieges". As Mr. Giduck explained:...


There are two types of prevalent terrorist attacks:
1) The Decimation Assault - such as suicide bombings, drive by shootings, etc.
2) The Siege - otherwise known as a Mass Hostage Siege.
Recent history shows us two that were reported in the popular media: The taking of over 800 hostages at the NordOst Theater in Moscow, and the taking of over 1,200 students, teachers and parents at the school in Beslan.

As Mr. Giduck pointed out: the Beslan siege had a larger number of hostages than that of the NordOst theater. Every time the terrorists attack they have to do something bigger and better. Follow that to the logical conclusion and that means that IF or WHEN they take over a target in America, the number of hostages will HAVE to be in excess of 1,200.

Now let's take a look at the popular targets, preferred method of attack and the resultant bad news for the United States:

1) Transportation: public transit systems can be attacked to cause interuption in service. The preferred method of attack is a Decimation Assault - suicide (although I prefer the term HOMICIDE) bomber. Poison has been used in other attacks, but the end affect is still roughly the same - there are a limited number of victims and a relatively short burst of media attention.

2) Malls: although we have these in abundance in the United States, the number of terrorists required to actually take over, secure and hold a mall would be difficult to mount. Therefore, the preferred method of attack would likely be the Decimation Assault. Not that the numbers of victims would be small. Virtually any urban mall on a Saturday night is packed with potential casualties.

3) Places of Worship: bearing in mind that a number of Imams have specifically stated that places of worship are viable targets. Skip Saturday night at the mall and you can hit Sunday morning in the churches all around our country. It is not coincidental that our "heartland" is largely populated by conservative devout citizens. Again, the method of attack would most likely be a Decimation Assault simply because there are very few churches where any terrorist would have a hope of taking more than 1,200 hostages.

4) Schools: Here is the bad news. We have schools in abundance. A great many high schools, and even plenty of our junior high / middle schools have student counts in excess of 1,200. I went to a private high school and even it had a student count near 1,000. Add in teachers and staff and how quick can you reach 1,200 or more? Now let's make it even scarier. We all know how the country reacted to two students killing thirteen people at Columbine. Those were high school students and a teacher. All of them were at least fourteen years old. Look at what the reaction was. Now imagine what it would have been had that been an elementary school and that those thirteen dead had been children under the age of ten. At Beslan, the terrorists had, as their hostages, babies still in diapers and children of all ages.

Now consider this: Al Queda trains to hit four targets at once. Why? As Mr. Giduck explains, because even terrorists understand Murphy's Law: what can go wrong will. If they plan and attempt to execute four simultaneous attacks, they expect at least two to move forward. If only ONE does and they get the kind of media attention they crave, then they've succeeded in part of their goal.

Now, before I attended Mr. Giduck's presentation, I would have assumed that there was simply no way that 49 or 50 terrorists could infiltrate the United States, secure weapons, plan the attack(s) and execute them. If you look at the recent news reports you can find - on any given day - reports on how many illegal immigrants are flowing into our country. How many of them could be terrorists? Potentially worse yet, how many terrorists are applying for political asylum from any country and getting temporary or permanent visas? We already know that they know how to get student and visitor visas. Still, how realistic is it to expect that 49 terrorists (the number that took Beslan school) will attack a single American school?

Let's take a look at a relatively small number: 15. Even using as an example only fifteen terrorists taking over a school, the challenges we face are immediate and daunting.

First, let's consider this: who is responsible for responding? Who will negotiate? Who will assault? Do any of our current tactical protocols effectively address the situation? I will answer these in that order.

1) Terrorism is a crime in the United States. Since it is a crime, law enforcement personnel will have to deal with it. Posse Comitatus explicitely prohibits the use of soldiers to affect an arrest, and even though arrest may not be on anyone's mind, all politicians will have to maintain a civil facade. Any terrorist that wants to surrender will have to be arrested and not executed. Let's just hope they aren't wrapped in explosives as they come out with their hands up, chanting to Allah before blowing themselves and anyone nearby into smithereens. So, it will be law enforcement that responds. Eventually the FBI will get on scene and take over. How long will that take? And how much longer will it be before a sufficient number of FBI HRT members are on hand to mount an assault? LONGER THAN WE CAN AFFORD.

2) Initially a local representative will negotiate. When the FBI arrives arrives and assumes command, an FBI agent will negotiate. Here in the United States we have a general rule of thumb: the longer we negotiate the better our chances are for a peaceful conclusion. We have time on our side. With "normal" criminals that's true. With terrorists, negotiation only provides time for more media to arrive while the terrorists fortify their positions inside the structure.

3) It's easy to think that the FBI HRT members will make any necessary assault. I'm not sure there are enough of them though. A standard rule of infantry is that it takes personnel numbering 3-to-1 (good guys to bad guys / assaulters to terrorists) to overwhelm a NON-entrenched enemy. If you give the enemy time to fortify their position, it takes closer to 9 or 10-to-1. Okay: so using that 15 terrorist scenario, we need about 150 FBI HRT guys on ready stand by to do the assault. Let's not forget: we also need 150 FBI HRT agents planning and training for the assault. Oh, and we have another 150 FBI HRT agents getting some down time - they have to sleep too. So that's a total of 450 FBI HRT agents. Are there that many? That's just assault troops, too. What about inner and outer perimeter? What about crowd control? What about counter-snipers?

4) Do any of our current tactical protocols effectively address the situation? No that I'm familiar with in law enforcement training. Right now we deliver, on a fairly regular basis, training that DOES adequately address the two-student-shooters model of Columbine High School. I don't believe our current training is even adequate to have responded to the five-shooter model that was stopped just last week in Kentucky. A four- or five-man diamond (so standard now) is decent against two students who have had no training and who may be quickly overcome. That same four- or five-man diamond would have faced a challenge with five student shooters. OK: so I here some of you mentally arguing, "But more teams form up and come in on a constant basis." Yep, you're right. And they move to the sound of shots aggressively - using that diamond formation with carefully trained tactics for checking doors, bypassing IEDs, etc.

"No plan survives first contact with the enemy." Remember that? The diamond is going to fall apart as soon as the team finds itself under any more than one shot or two at the most. Seeking cover will become a primary concern. How many agencies today train their officers to move under fire? Is Fire and Maneuver taught in any police academy? It took Russia's BEST troops in excess of nine hours to take back the Beslan school. What will our reaction be?

Well, here's how it's usually been presented in training for Active Shooter / Immediate Response:

"When you first arrive on the scene, listen for the sounds of shots. If there is an Active Shooter, advise communications and maintain a good position of observation until enough units arrive to form a team. Leave one officer in charge of communications while the team moves in under command of the first officer who arrived on the team. Move to the sound of shots and neutralize the threat."

What's going to happen when the 911 call comes in but when the officer arrives at the school he hears no shots? In the event of a terrorist takeover at any school, what our law enforcement personnel should be looking for is:

- a couple of large trucks with their motors running in the immediate vicinity.

- no children in any windows.

- no children evacuating (an emergency where no one is leaving?)

- no sounds of gunfire (because the terrorists KNOW how we train - they aren't stupid)

If that's what we find when we roll up, we had better get our act together hard and fast. Every second that passes guarantees two things: dead hostages and a more securely entrenched enemy.

Yes, we're going to lose cops. I disagree with the basic labelling of "terrorism" in this country. I don't think it should be considered a crime. I think it should be considered an act of war. That way we could at least get the military to assist. Speaking of that, if the governor declares a state of emergency fast enough, you MIGHT get National Guard troops to help with crowd control. You might get some equipment made available from them.

So, understanding that these terrorists are there getting their position hardened, the best thing we can do is attack as fast as we can plan and mount an assault. Yes, cops are going to die. Yes, hostages may die. What is guaranteed is that hostages WILL die if we SIT WAIT AND TALK.

For this very reason it is imperative that a new doctrine for response to Active Shooters be developed. "Active Shooter / Immediate Response" tactics and training must evolve into a training methodology that prepares our front line police officers to have some reasonable expectation of effectiveness if they assault into a school being held by terrorists armed with AK74s and explosives. The four- and five-man diamond will not work. In fact, every formation I can think of will fall apart pretty fast. Small unit tactics, applied to fire-team size (four) or even assault pairs (two), have to be developed, put into policy and then trained. What will be even more difficult is the following: cops have to be hardened both mentally and emotionally to face true battle.

Let's be honest: some cops today aren't warriors. They are civil servants who are dedicated to their jobs and do them well. But we all know a few that would be perfectly happy to man the radio while we go into the building where an Active Shooter is hunting innocent prey. We can't afford that. The harsh reality of life behind a badge is that we are the front line defense against anyone and anything that threatens to harm the innocents of our community. If we take the oath to Protect and Serve, we'd damned well better be as good as our word.

As the Russian Special Forces say, "If not me, who?" When the terrorists come to threaten and harm our children, I ask you: If not me, who? If not YOU, who?


by Frank Borelli

http://www.defensereview.com/modules.php?n...article&sid=873

Special Forces are often deployed to preclude, preempt and resolve terrorist incidents abroad.
They prevent, deter and respond to terrorist activities and train other nations' military in the basics of fighting terrorism.


http://www.goarmy.com/special_forces/counterterrorism.jsp

Read this somewhere....

"It's God's responsibility to forgive the terrorist organisation
It's our responsibility to arrange the meeting between them and god."


but we must make sure that they do not take any other innocent lives with them !

Lasers new sky-terror weapons?

An old article on possible terrorist threat using laser....


http://www.news24.com/News24/World/News/0,...1633998,00.html

Washington - Terrorists may seek to down aircraft by shining powerful lasers into cockpits to blind pilots during landing approaches, federal officials are warning in a bulletin distributed nationwide.
The memo, sent by the federal bureu of investigation and the homeland security department, says there is evidence that terrorists have explored using lasers as weapons, although there is no specific intelligence indicating al-Qaeda or other groups might use lasers in the United States.
"Although lasers are not proven methods of attack like improvised explosive devices and hijackings, terrorist groups overseas have expressed interest in using these devices against human sight," the memo said.
"In certain circumstances, if laser weapons adversely affect the eyesight of both pilot and co-pilot during a non-instrument approach, there is a risk of airliner crash," the agencies said.
In September, a pilot for Delta Air Lines reported an eye injury from a laser beam shone into the cockpit during a landing approach in Salt Lake City. The incident occurred about 5 miles from the airport and the plane landed safely.
Had heard of two or three cases
FBI and other federal officials are investigating. It is not clear if a crime was committed or if the laser was directed into the cockpit by accident.
Steve Luckey, a retired airline pilot who is chairman of the Airline Pilots Association's national security committee, said pilots were concerned about a recent increase in laser incidents, but did not know what to make of them.
He said he had learned of two or three cases in the past 90 days.
"The most-recent incidents appear to be aimed at pilots in the vicinity of airports," Luckey said. "A few seem to be intentional, and we're wondering why and what's going on."
Lasers can cause temporary blindness and severely damage the eye by burning the retina.
The bulletin notes they are "relatively inexpensive, portable, easy to conceal and readily available on the open market".
Variety of powerful lasers available
Lasers are commonly used in a number of industries and are featured in outdoor light shows.
A variety of more powerful military-grade lasers are produced around the world, but there is no evidence that terrorist groups have managed to obtain one, according to federal officials.
The bulletin was sent out late last month to law-enforcement officials and key government agencies and industries.

Toys From Hell


October 13, 2006:
In Sri Lanka, where terrorists has used suicide bombers and remote control bombs for nearly two decades, the government has banned the importing of radio controlled cars, aircraft and boats.
The government fears that terrorists would, say, maneuver a radio controlled truck, loaded with five pounds of explosives, so that it ended up under a military vehicle.
Then, boom. No terrorists have tried this, and maybe none have even thought of it yet, but someone in the government believed it better to be on the safe side.
The local terrorists are Hindu nationalists, who were the first modern terrorists to use of suicide bombing on a large scale.

Weapons of identity destruction'
October 15, 2006

Dr. Stephen Haag spends upwards of 80 hours each week on his computer, mapping out terrorist attacks.

Haag, an expert in emerging technologies, believes the next attack on the U.S. will come not in the form of bombings or military movements, but from terrorists armed with computer keyboards, credit cards and Social Security numbers.

A calculated cyber identity strike could erase or manipulate the identities of millions of Americans, effectively closing the financial markets and crippling the economy. ATMs would fail, airports would shut down, banks would close--all transactions would cease, says Haag, 45, an associate dean at the Daniels College of Business at the University of Denver.

Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security simulated its own cyberterrorism attack within federal, state and local governments. The department found that the country's coordinated response needed to be refined and solidified, according to a report it released last month.

Haag, who has written dozens of books on technology, has been researching identity terrorism for more than a year. He is a paid consultant for various government agencies, including NASA, the Air Force and the EPA, and for private companies such as First Data Corp., an electronic payments processor.

He recently talked to the Tribune about identity terrorism. An edited transcript follows.

Q: What is identity terrorism, and how is it different from identity theft?

A: Identity theft, as we traditionally know it, is someone stealing your identity and charging $1,500 worth of stuff. Identity terrorism is very much a step beyond that. It's identity theft on steroids.

Q: Why steal identities?

A: If they know our identity, then they know how to destroy it. And if they know how to destroy it, then we can't do anything. ... Destroy the identities of 30 [million] to 40 million people in one afternoon, [and] you are crippling the economy.

Q: Can this actually be done?

A: Sure it can. It's the same notion as that of a computer virus. What they would have to do is write a little piece of software, weapons of identity destruction, all sitting on a Web server on the Internet, timed and waiting to go. They would unleash the virus, so it could crash banks, financial institutions, the government identity management systems, any large company in which a lot of transactions are made.

Q: What are the steps of an identity terror strike? How would this happen?

A: Identity theft occurs in many ways--people stealing laptops, spoofing e-mails, sending out phishing e-mails. ... Those people who have the stolen identities would sell them to a terrorist group.

The terrorists then would have to take a look at the information and build these weapons of identity destruction, very small pieces of software that would go out [over the Internet] for the millions of people for whom they have identities, and alter their identities within organizations, within the Social Security Administration, within First Data, within MasterCard, within airlines, ... whatever it has to be.

The result would be to cause a transaction failure, for the system to say, I don't recognize you anymore and therefore cannot process your transaction.

Q: What would result from such an attack?

A: If 1 out of every 10 transactions failed, it shuts everything down. If you've got 1 out of every 10 people in an airport who can't check in because their ID is not recognized, the airport shuts down. Grocery and retail stores shut down if they can't process the credit card of 1 out of every 10 customers coming through the door.

Q: How would the country respond?

A: The question becomes ... once this has occurred, how do you identify for which people it has occurred and how do you fix those people without trying to go back and fix everyone in the country.

Q: Are the government and private companies prepared for this?

A: We are probably ill-prepared because we are just now in the early stages of conceiving what this would look like if it occurs. Our current systems are certainly not prepared to handle it.

Q: How could people prepare?

A: It is extremely difficult to protect yourself. You can take all the normal steps to protect your identity from being stolen. ... But the majority of the identities being stolen today are not being stolen from individuals but from the companies who have the identity management systems...

We need to monitor the breaches in these systems. There is no coordinated approach to it right now.

Q: You say it is not a matter of if, but when. Do terrorists have these tools now?

A: Realistically, this is something that can happen at any point in time. ... This, theoretically, is something very much that could happen tomorrow.


http://www.chicagotribune.com/technology/c...ack=1&cset=true

New Intel squadron turns aerial eye on terrorists
by Chief Master Sgt. Gary Emery

Terrorists and their supporters around the world soon will be under the gaze of a powerful "unblinking eye" providing information on their whereabouts to a "brain" here.
The reactivation of the 11th Intelligence Squadron here marks a milestone for Air Force Special Operations Command, which gains its first intelligence squadron. The 11th IS, commanded by Lt. Col. David Hambleton, is assigned to Air Force Special Operations Forces, AFSOC' s war fighting headquarters.
The squadron's mission is to process, exploit and disseminate to commanders information gathered by AFSOC' s MQ-1 Predator unmanned aerial vehicles and other airborne intelligence and surveillance sources, Colonel Hambleton said. The Predator is a medium-altitude, long-endurance, remotely piloted aircraft operated by the 3rd Special Operations Squadron at Creech Air Force Base, Nevada.
Operators at Creech AFB use remote controls to fly Predators anywhere in the world, around the clock. That capability, when fully realized, will create what Army Gen. Doug Brown, commander of U.S. Special Operations Command, calls an "unblinking eye" for special operations forces.
But even an unblinking eye is worthless without a brain to process the information the eye sees, said Col. Timothy Leahy, AFSOF vice commander.
"That's where the 11th IS comes in," he said.
"We're going to extract intel value from data streams coming off (reconnaissance aircraft), figure out what the bad guys are doing and provide information to special ops commanders so they can make combat decisions," Colonel Hambleton said. "Basically, the 3rd SOS will provide the data, and we'll tailor it for the SOF customer forward."
Special operations forces require SOF-specific intelligence, Colonel Hambleton said. So the entire data gathering-analysis-combat commander chain is specialized and unique compared to the way other Air Force commands process and disseminate data, he said.

For instance, AFSOC is the only major command where the intelligence weapons system, called the distributed common ground system, works hand-in-hand with the air operations center. In AFSOC, both the DCGS and AOC report to the AFSOF commander, Col. Michael Callan.
"I'm very excited to see the 11th IS a reality," Colonel Callan said. "Many dedicated members of the AFSOF and AFSOC staffs have worked very hard to make this day happen.
"Having the 11th IS provide dedicated intelligence support to our warfighters will make us better able to find, fix and finish our adversaries," he said. "I welcome Colonel Hambleton and his squadron members to AFSOF".
In the war on terrorism, tracking down elusive enemies is akin to what Lt. Gen. Michael W. Wooley, AFSOC commander, calls "finding the proverbial needle not in a haystack, but hiding among other needles."
Intel specialists of the 11th IS will "be able to discern what that needle among needles is doing," Colonel Leahy said.
"Once the operators of the 11th Intelligence Squadron find and fix the enemy, the world's best special operators, riding in the back of AFSOC aircraft, will go in and finish them," he said.

Source: U.S. Air Force
http://newsblaze.com/story/20060829160257t...op-Stories.html

http://www.air-attack.com/news/news_articl...terrorists.html