Terrorist Alert: Unmanned Aerial Vehicles.

By Jamie Glazov
FrontPageMagazine.com | 4/3/2009

FrontPage Interview’s guest today is Ben R. Furman, the FBI's Former Counterterrorism Chief. He writes a blog at blackhawkpress.com/blog, and he is the author of The Devil’s Darning Needle, a counterterrorism thriller.

FP: Ben R. Furman, welcome to Frontpage Interview.

I’d like to talk to you today about unmanned aerial vehicles and what they mean to the terror war.

How do we start this discussion?

Furman: Jane’s, a military weapons systems authority, just published the specifics and details of over 180 operational unmanned aerial vehicles (UAVs), and also reported that more than forty countries are developing and/or deploying UAV systems.

As an example, on March 20, 2008, Pakistan’s Chief of Army, Staff General Ashfaq Kayani, displayed a Pakistani-made UAV that successfully completed flight trials and is ready for production. Unmanned combat and intelligence systems are a major thrust for us as shown by the 2008 billion dollars plus Department of Defense budget dedicated to developing and acquiring micro aerial vehicles (MAVs) and UAVs.

I became aware of the micro unmanned robot world and its attractiveness to terrorists during research for my counterterrorism novel, The Devil’s Darning Needle. I took literary license and slightly advanced the capabilities of a prototype dragonfly robotic MAV I discovered and used it as my attack delivery system. Their small size and carbon fiber skins echoed as birds on radar monitors, and their lethal potential for dispensing explosives or deadly chemical/biological agents made them the perfect weapon.

Too Sci-Fi? Here’s a taste of the newest technology. In the micro vehicle area the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency (DARPA), responsible for the development of new technology for use by the military, is evaluating the MicroSTAR, a low flying MAV that weighs 85 grams and measures 15 centimeters across. It’s capable of carrying an infra-red or visible light camera for surveillance, or biological/chemical “sniffers” and it provides real-time actionable intelligence. An autopilot and inertial navigation is integrated into the system, and the tiny bot flies at 30 mph for up to 20 minute missions. It’s designed to be launched at the platoon level, or released from over-flying planes.

FP: So can terrorists get their hands on these easily?

Furman: From a practical standpoint, acquiring these highly sophisticated, tightly held, ultra expensive UAVs or MAVs is out of the question. So what’s a poor jihadist to do? Well, it’s easy and inexpensive to build or buy a functioning, improvised UAV.


Let’s see what can be accomplished on “the cheap.” What can a terrorist buy for $9.95?


-- A “Happy Meal” with fries and a diet Coke, or the plans for a miniature remote controlled, tank-tracked ground platform.


-- What can he buy for $19.95? A set of Ginzu knives with a potato peeler thrown in comes to mind, or how about the plans for building a miniature version of the Predator?


-- If he’s tech challenged, can’t change a light switch, but flushed with money, a flight-ready model of the Predator can be bought for $199.95 from a hobby shop that’s easy to modify for sinister purposes.


-- Comparison shopping: The real one costs about $3.5 million per copy, not including the ground control systems.


Today, remote controlled aircraft, radio transmission systems, camera phones, GPS, Google Earth, Google Maps, computer programmable navigational systems and technologies are readily available on the Internet, in toy stores (Lego’s programmable lift platform, for example), and on the shelves of hobby shops.


Cobble everything together and a terrorist would be hard pressed to spend more than $3,000 for a robotic plane with a six-foot wing span that cruises at 45 mph for thirty minutes at 1,500 feet, and carries a fifteen pound payload. No, it’s not the equivalent of a Global Hawk or the Predator with Hellfire missiles, but it will fly and quite well.


Legitimate enthusiasts build their vehicles for the fun and challenge of it; terrorists build them to cause death and mayhem. And, they don’t have to smuggle anything into the country. Terrorists can legitimately buy what they need to build an improvised unmanned vehicle off the shelf and modify it to suit their purposes. Keep in mind that terrorists seek the world stage – they know the more horrific the act the more media coverage they can demand. And even a small attack, if properly focused, can produce a major psychological effect on the entire nation.


Imagine the reaction should a swarm of MAVs smash into the center of a packed sports stadium and explode or disperse a deadly toxin, or if a dozen remote controlled road-side IED drones were spun into the path of an Army truck convoy.


The concern about robotic micro vehicles and ICCDs surfaced during the 9/11 commission hearings and in various intelligence gathering committees as well. In February, 2004 former CIA Director George Tenet appeared before the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence and said this, “Many countries remain interested in developing or acquiring land-attack cruise missiles, which are almost always significantly more accurate than ballistic missiles and complicate missile defense systems. Unmanned aerial vehicles are also of growing concern."


FP: So what does the near future hold in terms of this terrifying reality?


Furman: While no terrorist incidents involving unmanned vehicles have yet been reported in the U.S., that doesn’t mean terrorist planners aren’t considering them as a means of delivery. They’ve surfaced elsewhere as the following examples show:

The Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC), an anti-government terrorist group, was discovered in possession of nine remote-controlled unmanned aircraft when a Colombian army unit overran one of their remote camps in August 2002. (Source: EFE News Service, August 28, 2002.)

The Vremya Novostei newspaper reported the plans for Israel’s newest developmental reconnaissance UAV model were stolen from a building plant in Israel. The UAV weighs 14 kg and has a wingspan of 1.5 m. There were fears about the possible use of the model by terrorists. (Source: Vremya Novostey, November 11, 2003.)

Hamas said six of their senior activists were killed in March, 2004 when an ICCD they had planned to launch against Israel blew up prematurely in central Gaza as it was being prepared for flight. Authorities surmised the ICCD drone was packed with explosives. (Source: Jane's Missiles and Rockets, December 1, 2004.)

On 04/20/05 the Defense Industry Daily reported: For the second time in five months, Hezbollah militants operating an Iranian-made drone, the Mirsad-1 UAV, penetrated Israel’s air defenses and flew unmolested for nearly nine minutes over Western Galilee cities and settlements before returning safely to southern Lebanon. The UAV was not initially picked up by Israel’s elaborate, overlapping sensor-fused early warning network.

According to the story, Israel’s current air defenses are not designed to detect and recognize small, low-flying, slow-moving objects like small UAVs. Their flight profiles on radar and even through electro-optical and other sensors, is obscured by ground clutter, glare and other environmental conditions. “It’s like catching a mosquito with a net,” said Brigadier General Ruth Yaron, Israel Defense Forces (IDF) chief spokeswoman.

International intelligence analysts have expressed concerns that future UAV incursions could be equipped with more deadly payloads like biological or chemical agents. The Mirsad-1 can carry 50 kilograms of explosives.

Tree top-hugging, radar-resistant improvised UAVs operating close to an intended target, perhaps line-of-sight close, are major problems. Our response contingency planning to address this kind of threat has to be “spot on.” There won’t be much time to react to improvised UAVs even if they’re only flying at 35 mph – 45 mph. The authority to act will be critical, and those manning the turrets must be the decision-makers. There won’t be time to run the situation up the chain-of-command and back.


FP: Aren’t we giving the terrorists ideas by talking about this?


Furman: Initially I wondered if talking openly about this danger was a good idea. Wouldn’t it be a “heads up” for terrorists? No. A thorough library check and Internet and blog searches revealed the technology wafted out of the genie’s bottle some time ago, and even with technology that advances in quantum leaps, someone is keeping pace and reporting or commenting about it real-time. Chat rooms, YouTube and FaceBook are heavily peppered with “how to” information about building and flying improvised UAVs and MAVs. If you have a question about building a bot, ask it and instantly a dozen answers appear on your computer screen.


Before my FBI partner and I entered dark and scary places he always reminded me to, “Put your head on a swivel like an owl.” He wanted me totally focused and aware of my surroundings; great advice that kept us safe. So, if you hear what sounds like an angry lawn mower flying overhead, you might want to check it out, or the spider that went off like a sparkler when you squashed it underfoot might be worth a closer look.


Let’s not forget: Security is everyone’s job, and as my partner wisely said, put your head on a swivel and always be mindful of your surroundings.


FP: Ben R. Furman, thank you for joining us.

TAGS: advice counterterrorism stories independent publishing news publisher reviews

The FATA & Terrorism

By Ben Furman, Former FBI Counterterrorism Chief

In February 2008 Mike McConnell, the Director of US National Intelligence, testified before the House Intelligence Committee and said this, “The FATA (Federally Administered Tribal Areas) of Pakistan serve as a staging area for al Qaeda’s attacks in support of the Taliban in Afghanistan as well as a location for training new terrorist operatives for attacks in Pakistan, the Middle East, Africa, Europe, and the United States.”

Pakistan is a terrorism crossroad and its border provinces provide a safe haven that has allowed al Qaeda to regenerate critical elements of its attack capability, including re-filling key leadership positions.

Geographically, the FATA are bordered by: Afghanistan to the west along the Durand Line, the term for the 1,610 mile border between Afghanistan and Pakistan, the North-West Frontier Province, the Punjab to the east, and Balochistan to the south. The seven tribal areas of Khyber, Kurram, Bajaur, Mohamand, Orakzai, north and south areas of Waziristan form the FATA. They lie in a north to south strip adjacent to the west side of the six frontier regions of Peshawar, Kohat, Tank, Banuu, Lakki and Dera Ismail Khan that also lie north to south. According to CIA figures the total population of the FATA in 2000 was 3,341,070 people, or roughly 2% of Pakistan's population. It is a rural territory with only 3.1% of the population residing in established townships.

The region is nominally controlled by the central government of Pakistan. In reality the Pashtun tribes inhabit the territory, and they are ruled by tribal elders. The tribes are fiercely independent and not overly friendly with Pakistan’s central government, which has done little to root out the terrorist enclaves that are easily located since they operate in the open with impunity.

The central government is shaky and operates in constant fear of a military junta. Pakistan has about 85 nuclear weapons that are under the total control of the Pakistani military, and Pakistan is steadily adding to its nuclear weapon stockpile. For example, China has agreed to build two nuclear power plants in Pakistan. This deal – especially if it does not contain mechanisms to prevent nuclear material from being transferred from the new civilian plants to military facilities – signals a nascent nuclear arms race in Asia. A 2007 poll of 117 nongovernmental terrorism experts found that 74 percent consider Pakistan, not Iran, the country most likely to transfer nuclear technology to terrorists in the next three to five years.

How did Pakistan become a nuclear weapon country? Through the illicit work of a nationalist Islamic scientist, A. Q. Khan, the father of Pakistan’s “Islamic bomb” and the purveyor of sensitive nuclear technology across the Middle East and Asia – to Libya, North Korea and perhaps to other countries. There may be other Pakistani scientists who have been or would be willing to work with other countries or with terrorists to help them acquire nuclear weapons.

So where is this leading? We have tribal areas sympathetic to al Qaeda, and a country with nuclear technology and devices that possibly could be acquired by al Qaeda through its liaisons with Pakistani militants. A recent National Intelligence Estimate said, “al Qaeda will continue trying to acquire and employ chemical, biological, radiological or nuclear material, and it would not hesitate to use them if it develops sufficient capability.”

Pakistan is an ally, but there’s a grave danger it could also be an unwitting source of a terrorist attack on the United States, perhaps by weapons of mass destruction. The Mumbai, India attack by the Lashkar-e-Taiba terrorists (1) with alleged links to elements of Pakistan’s Inter-Services Intelligence Agency has raised the tension between the two countries to a tipping point. Pakistan military resources recently directed against terrorist activity in the FATA are being re-deployed along the India/Pakistan border to address a possible attack by India. This is a real possibility since there have been three violent conflicts between the countries since 1947, and a contentious and sometimes violent border dispute over Kashmir continues. Al Qaeda thrives on this kind of volatility and once out of the spotlight it will plot the next attack.

On his list of problems to address our President must put Pakistan and the tribal areas near the top.

- - - - Footnotes - - - -

(1) Lashkar-e-Taiba is a self-described militant Islamic group based in Pakistan and Kashmir. Their stated goal is to end any Indian occupation of Kashmir and to further promote a fundamentalist Islamic government in Pakistan and throughout South Asia.
The Pakistani government stated that senior members of Lashkar-e-Taiba have confessed to being involved in the attacks. And India's Prime Minister Manmohan Singh said on January 6, 2009, that evidence suggested official Pakistani agencies likely supported the terrorist organization in its attack on Mumbai.

TAGS: action adventure adventure series adviceindependent publishing news publisher reviews

Border Drug Wars, Bombs & Terrorism

By Ben Furman, former FBI Counterrorism Chief

Our southwestern border is surely in the same zip code as Hell!

A November 16, 2008 Los Angeles Times article pointed out that, “Few regions of the U.S. are immune to drug-trafficking organizations that have caused horrendous death and destruction." So far in 2008 drug related violence in Mexico has left nearly 4,000 of its people dead. And the violence has spread deep into the United States. There is a trail of slayings, kidnappings and other serious crimes that lead to at least 195 cities as far as Atlanta, Boston, Seattle and Honolulu.

The current top four Mexican drug-trafficking organizations battling for turf and dominance have brought a war once considered a foreign problem to the doorstep of local U.S. communities. There’s ample documentation to show the violence associated with the Mexican drug wars is wreaking havoc on the northern border towns of Mexico, and this violence has shattered our border.

This September intelligence sources advised the Washington Times that Mexico's drug cartel members and police officials in Mexico, trying to spare their families from the violence that has overwhelmed many Mexican border towns, could begin relocating them to the United States. This could prove problematic for us and result in more homicides and home invasions along the southwestern border, increased availability of high-powered weapons to Mexican drug smugglers already in the U.S., and the likelihood that the family members would continue the drug operations once they are here.

Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) reported an unprecedented surge in violence along the 1,951-mile US-Mexico border with 892 border agents assaulted in fiscal year 2008 - a stark increase when compared to the 638 assaults during the first 10 months of fiscal year 2006.

Interdiction operations by our law enforcement agents and Mexican authorities are ongoing, and though I monitor a lot of it there’s “sameness” to the operations. A dozen or so cartel members arrested, large quantities of drugs recovered, weapons and the like has become usual fare, and the “busts” are generally carried next to the papers’ obit pages. But there is a recent upward trend that’s caught my attention. The use of remotely detonated bombs or improvised explosive devices (IED) is becoming more pervasive, and could well become the major kill weapon employed by the cartels in the future. IEDs are the largest killers of U.S. troops in Iraq, and according to Pentagon figures, through January 20, 2008 IEDs have killed 1,327 troops and wounded 11,861 others.

During a January 2006 raid on a drug gang in Laredo, Texas, federal agents seized two completed IEDs, materials for making 33 more, 300 primers, 1,280 rounds of ammunition, five grenades, nine pipes with end caps, 26 grenade triggers (14 with fuses and primers attached), 31 grenade spoons, 40 grenade pins, 19 black powder casings, a silencer and cash.

On February 27, 2008 in Mexico City an attack meant to kill the police chief failed when the bomb exploded prematurely, killing the bomb carrier. The attack according to the police was planned from outside the capital and it raised fears that Mexico's drug cartels could be starting a bomb campaign against the government in reaction to an army-led operation to crush them.

In an October 2007 sting operation, police “purchased” seven IEDs from a bomb maker and recovered two more in his house in Freemont, California. Some were designed to detonate remotely by cell phone transmission.

At this juncture the IEDs being used by the drug assassins aren't identical to those manufactured by the Iranians. But it doesn’t take much of a stretch to believe going forward as the drug cartels want even more sophisticated deadly devices that they will obtain the expertise of the terrorist bomb makers. It's past arguing that the MS-13 gang members and “coyotes” (human traffickers) have been smuggling illegal aliens from the Middle East into the U.S. for years, and many of those illegals are from Iran. Most certainly members of the elite Revolutionary Guards (RG) have infiltrated our country by crossing the southern border. It is important to remember the man in charge of the RG is appointed by and reports to the supreme religious leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, the true power broker of Iran. Any chaos that the Iranians can cause the U.S. fits into their jihadist plans, and this might include providing IED technology to those involved in the border wars. Today the RG are training the Iraqi insurgents in the use of IEDs and in the manufacture and use of the even more deadly explosively formed projective (EFP) capable of destroying an Abrams tank.

A border patrol veteran in an April 2008 confidential report said that, “They’ve (drug cartels) got weapons, high-tech radios; computers, cell phones, GPS, spotters and they react faster than we can. They have no hesitancy to attack the agents on the line with anything from assault rifles and improvised Molotov cocktails to rocks, concrete slabs and bottles.” Soon, I’m afraid; he can add remotely detonated IEDs to the arsenals of the drug cartels.

TAGS:advice counterterrorism stories independent publishing news publisher reviews

Terrorism & Other than Mexican (OTM) Illegal Aliens

By Ben Furman, former FBI Counterterrorism Chief

Other than Mexican (OTM) is a strange term. What does it mean? Ninety percent of the illegal aliens who cross the U.S. southern border each year from Mexico are Mexicans. The rest that come from all parts of the world are labeled Other than Mexican illegals by our government.

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) that oversees Customs, Immigration and Border Patrol enforcement said in a recent oversight committee that tens of thousands of OTMs enter the U.S. illegally each year. They have no idea of the actual number. Their statistics for 2005 show that of the 98,000 illegal aliens detained by the U.S. Border Patrol from countries other than Mexico (OTMs) 70 percent (68,800) were immediately released into the interior of the U.S.

Why? Their home countries wouldn’t take them back and because we didn’t have a place to keep them, each was given a “ticket” and released after promising to return for his court date. Twelve percent returned in 2006, which left over 60,000 unaccounted for, and in some Texas Border Patrol sectors during this time the “no-show” rates were as high as 98 percent. Many of those released have serious prior felony criminal records. On October 18, 2005 the Border Patrol finally ended the “Catch & Release” program. Now the illegal aliens are supposed to be kept until the legality of their status is determined and then deported if they are here illegally. Sounds easy and logical until anti-illegal alien groups and attorneys get involved to prevent any deportation.

But here’s the core reason for my post. In 2005 DHS said 850 people from countries of “special interest” were apprehended crossing our southern border. In 2006 DHS reported between 2001 and 2005 that 45,000 OTMs from countries on the U.S. list of state sponsors of terror (SST) or from countries that protected terrorist organizations and their members were released into America’s general public. This was done even though immigration officers could not confirm their identity. Remember, these are people that were caught, which represents only one out of ten that actually cross the border. That means that approximately 400,000 illegal aliens from Iran, Iraq, Syria, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Yemen, whose identities could not be verified and who could be working for terrorist groups, are freely moving about the country.

The FBI has testified numerous times that since it’s easy to enter the U.S. illegally without detection, terrorist groups believe that operationally there are no reasons to get visas, etc. to gain legal entry. Also, there’s an increase in the number of illegal aliens from countries with al Qaeda connections that are changing their identities to appear Hispanic by dropping their Islamic surnames. Posing as Hispanics they blend in with the mass of illegal aliens crossing the border. Again, DHS doesn’t have any idea how many potential terrorists have entered the country using this tactic.

Professional smugglers, called “coyotes” and MS-13, a notorious Salvadorian criminal gang that has infiltrated all of our lower 48 states, use their pipelines to smuggle Middle Eastern and Asian illegals into the U.S. for $10,000 to $20,000 per person with no questions asked. A coyote caught with his “cargo” recently admitted that none of the men he has transported over the past six years was looking for a job or to “help his family.”

Do the math. There are roughly 15 to 20 million illegal aliens in the U.S. and ten percent of those are OTMs. Any percentage of the OTMs that are from hostile countries constitutes hundreds of thousands. It’s the barn door analogy with frightening, staggering safety implications. Unless we can devise a system for rooting out the hostiles who have infiltrated our country, we’re in for a grim day ahead. I shook my head in disbelief when I heard two members of the new administration’s transition team say granting amnesty to all illegal aliens will be a priority. And amnesty my friends, also includes the terrorists!

TAGS: advice counterterrorism storiesindependent publishing news publisher reviews

Consequence Management -- WMD

By Ben Furman, former FBI Counterterrorism Chief

Foreign and domestic terrorists continue to poke and probe at our defenses with the sinister intent to use chemical, biological or nuclear weapons (WMD) against us. If they are successful, can we respond to and manage the death and destruction that we’ll face in the aftermath?

Giant steps have been taken to coordinate and incorporate civilian and military assets into dedicated prevention and response forces, and fast paced efforts are ongoing. This post will be a quick introduction. The “how consequence management works” will be addressed in subsequent posts.

Is the terrorist threat real? Yes, though many conspiracy theorists think not and believe our “evil” government is behind it all, including blowing up the twin towers. Their brain cells are fried and as for the rest of us, our memories are short. Most Americans equate 9/11 as the beginning of the terrorist attacks on our soil. Not so. The 1993 bombing of the New York twin towers was the precursor. The subsequent investigation and trial testimony revealed the terrorists meant to topple one tower into the other and shroud both in a cascading cloud of cyanide gas. If the plan had worked tens of thousands of us would have been killed. It didn’t because the cyanide gas was destroyed in the heat of the explosion rather than vaporizing into a death cloud as the terrorists planned. And do you recall Ramzi Yousef, the man who built the bomb? Two years later Yousef was arrested for plotting to blow up 11 U.S. passenger planes to cause, as he boasted, “One spectacular day of terrorist rage.”

Besides wringing our hands worrying about an attack what are we doing? Actually we’re doing a number of things. Here’s one step. Presidential Decision Directive (PDD) 39 was issued by President Clinton in 1995 to establish response and management guidelines for a WMD terrorist attack. The PDD divides threats into two categories: crisis response and consequence management. Since the issuance of the guidelines there have been a series of directives and laws that further define the response and management mission.

In a best case scenario, which never happens, here’s the way a crisis response works. The plot is uncovered, the terrorists that are preparing to set off a WMD are identified, and the operation is neutralized or “taken down.” The homeland response for responding to such crises falls under the purview of the FBI. Overseas the response is handled by the Department of State, Office of Counterterrorism.

Consequence management comes into play if terrorists successfully deploy a WMD. The PDD also details how the physical, socio-economic, and psychological effects of a chemical or biological attack should be addressed, to include the coordination of local, regional, national, and international assets before, during, and after an attack. These assets include the military working in concert with its domestic counterparts.

In reality there has to be joint planning and coordination between the crisis response and the consequence management folks long before there is an incident. There can’t be a rigid division between the two and there isn’t. Information sharing and real time communication are essential. I can say from personal experience that during a crisis, even a small one, there’s a lot of confusion and information that turns out not to be true. To minimize this all of the right pieces have to be connected before an attack occurs. During a crisis this Abbott and Costello routine can’t happen.

Abbott: Now let's see. We have on the bags - we have Who's on first, What's on second, I Don't Know's on third.

Costello: Well then who's on first?

Abbott: Yes!

Costello: I mean the fellow's name!

Abbott: Who!

Are we totally prepared? Of course not, but force ready responders are being trained and deployed. Much more needs to be done but progress is being made. The situation is far from being all doom and gloom.

TAGS: adult counterterrorism books advice counterterrorism books independent publishing news publisher

The National Counter Terrorism Center (NCTC)

In the aftermath of 9/11 the world heard the scathing indictment of the U.S. intelligence agencies charged with preventing terrorist attacks. The dots weren’t connected! Why? Because intelligence agencies that had bits and pieces of the attack information hadn’t provided it to their counterparts. There was a myriad of reasons for this, including protecting one’s turf, fear of critical information leaks to the press and the like, but the “stove pipe” analogy was the most troubling. “Stovepiping” was the practice of only sending information up the chain of command within an agency. The 9/11 Commission also called this reluctance to share the “Gorelick Wall.”

Jamie Gorelick was the U. S.Deputy Attorney General under the Clinton administration, who wrote the 1995 intelligence guideline memorandum for disseminating terrorist information between agencies. And even though there was back-and-forth finger pointing about the extent intelligence agencies were prohibited from sharing crucial information, her memorandum was widely cited as the legally restrictive lynch pin. The intelligence community thought a violation of the memorandum guidelines would lead to civil suits and felony criminal prosecutions by the Justice Department. The bottom line: Agents believed they could lose their homes, pensions, be fired and sent to prison. A very chilling cloud to work under, and it wasn’t a comforting sight to see Jamie Gorelick sitting on the 9/11 Commission panel overseeing the hearings.

But some good did come in the form of recommendations by the Commission. The National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC) was formed. Heard of it? Unless you’re part of the intelligence community most likely you haven’t, or if you did you’ve forgotten about it as you went about day-to-day tasks. After 9/11 a number of agencies known by their initials were mixed together to form alphabet soup organizations, such as the Office of Homeland Security. Of all the groups the NCTC was one that made sense to me.

The NCTC was established by President Bush in August 2004, to serve as the primary U.S. organization to integrate and analyze all intelligence pertaining to terrorism and counterterrorism, and to construct strategic operational plans. The NCTC also houses the central knowledge bank on terrorism information, and it developed the architecture that allows agencies such as the FBI and CIA ready access to the millions of terrorist related documents contained in the database.

The NCTC is staffed by analysts from 16 agencies that are co-located with the CIA and FBI Watch Centers at the Liberty Crossing Center in Northern Virginia. There analysts from these agencies work side-by-side scouring foreign and domestic terrorism information from 30 networks or more in an effort to uncover and disrupt terrorist plots.

Is everything perfect? No, but we’re getting our act together. It isn’t by accident that we haven’t suffered a major terrorist attack on our home territory since 9/11, but for logistical reasons and to protect ongoing investigations, many positive results aren’t trumpeted in the New York Times or on the evening news. You can take it to the bank that because our intelligence agencies are working together around the clock there have been attacks prevented, plots uncovered, and terrorists captured or killed that we don’t know about, and quite frankly, don’t need to. Fighting terrorism is an ongoing battle. Now the terrorists don’t have an open field; they can’t act with impunity and they’re getting more than they’re giving.

I’ll have more to say about the NCTC in later postings.

TAGS: action adventure action books adult counterterrorism books adult fiction thriller adult novels adventure series advice counterterrorism stories independent publishing news publisher reviews suspense thrillers writing advice

Terrorism Defined -- Adult

This is the first in a series of posts that will deal with terrorism.

If you want to enter a never-ending fracas, just come up with your own definition of terrorism and jump in. Even though terrorism has been used since the beginning of recorded history, it’s still a bear to define.

So where does the term terrorist come from anyway? The Latin word terrere means “to frighten.” The French word terrorisme brought the usage forward in time. The word is associated with the regime de la terreur, (the Reign of Terror, circa 1793 – 1794). Those who implemented the orders of the regime, which included mass executions of “enemies of the French revolution,” were called terrorists. The term has stuck.

At any point in time there are more than one hundred definitions of terrorism circulating about. Reading the various studies that try to arrive at a universal definition will put one to sleep. I have and they did. I read one that said there are twenty-two definitional elements that have to be considered. But after all of the back-and-forth the only tiny point of agreement between the scholars that I could find is this: terrorism involves violence and the threat of violence.

The UK and its former colonies define terrorism tightly. I’ll get to that in a moment. But first, I have to punish you with the U.N.’s meandering, politically correct definition. This is it: An anxiety-inspiring method of repeated violent action, employed by (semi-) clandestine individual, group or state actors, for idiosyncratic, criminal or political reasons, whereby - in contrast to assassination - the direct targets of violence are not the main targets.

Most of academia accepts this toothless definition then adds to it such verbose concepts as "message generators" and 'violence based communication processes." As if “anxiety-inspiring” isn’t enough to make even a Billy goat puke!

Here’s the deal, like pornography, one knows it when one sees it. The same holds for terrorism. Watching a grainy video tape of some innocent guy getting his head cut off with a dull butcher knife by mutant thugs pretty much says it all. I guess lopping off a head would be considered a “message generator.”

These are my preferred definitions. The FBI uses: “Terrorism is the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives." Crisp and clean.

The Department of Defense says terrorism is “the calculated use of unlawful violence or threat of unlawful violence to inculcate fear; intended to coerce or to intimidate governments or societies in the pursuit of goals that are generally political, religious, or ideological.” This one has the three elements that are found in each terrorist act --violence, fear, and intimidation—and each element produces terror in its victims.

What’s the big deal with the definition? Well, there has to be an agreement among the front line folks about what is or isn’t a terrorist act. Everyone has to be on the same page, just like the terrorists. And without this understanding no cohesive battle plan to combat terrorism can be drawn. The definition is the key stone that holds the plan and the folks that implement it together.

TAGS: action adventure action books adult counterterrorism books advice counterterrorism stories independent publishing news publisher reviews suspense thrillers

Black Hawk Press Counterterrorism Blog

Welcome to the counterterrorism blog of Black Hawk Press publisher and author Ben Furman!

This blog provides you with posts concerning the ongoing terrorist picture here and abroad, and what is being done to checkmate it. This is my background: I was an FBI agent for twenty-two years, during which I investigated bank robberies, kidnappings, extortions, organized crime, and terrorism. The rough-and-tumble world of counterterrorism proved to be my greatest but most rewarding challenge. As a counterterrorism chief I directed multi-agency task forces that combated chemical, biological and nuclear threats against the United States. Currently I am the CEO of the Rexus Corporation, a private security and investigation firm that does national and international work.

I also write thrillers that are based on my counterterrorism experience. The SWAT tactics, investigative techniques, cutting edge technology, the interplay between agencies, and the point - counterpoint between agents and terrorists gives you an insider’s look at the underbelly of a frightening world. The clock is ticking….

Please return often for my commentary and feel free to add your comments or ask questions. I'll give you my best answers. For more information, visit my main site at www.blackhawkpress.com or follow the "Home" link above.

TAGS: action books adult counterterrorism books childrens adventure books counterterrorism stories fantasy books independent publishing news young adult books