German officials reported that the single indicator which led them to the planned terrorist attack against U.S. facilities and interests in Germany was the very observable surveillance conducted by one member of the cell, identified only as “Fritz G” against U.S. military facilities. “Fritz G” was observed conducting surveillance of a U.S. military base in Hanau Germany in such a manner that was indicative of pre-incident attack planning.
While it’s not known what prompted the cell to select a different target to attack, the cells’ modus operandi is typical of the hostile planning cycle used by terrorists. Once the decision has been made to conduct a terrorist attack, terrorists will place multiple targets under surveillance to assess security, determine target vulnerabilities and subsequently select a target to attack based on information obtained during the initial surveillance. The initial surveillance leads to pre-attack surveillance which is more intensive and focused on developing an attack plan that is specific to one target. It is during both the initial surveillance and the pre-attack surveillance that terrorist entities expose themselves
There are three elements used to detect terrorist surveillance. These elements are location, correlation and mistakes. Location refers to repeated observations of persons or vehicles at different times and places relative to the target. The second element is correlation. This refers to the behavior of the suspected surveillant in correlation to the activity of the target i.e. arrivals, departures. The third element is mistakes on the part of the hostile surveillant which identifies them as engaging in surveillance.
In the case of the German cell, “Fritz G” appears to have demonstrated at least two of the three signatures. By keying in on these three elements as indicators of terrorist surveillance, authorities were able to determine that Fritz G’s behavior was indicative of hostile intent and warranted placing him under surveillance.
This incident again demonstrates the value of surveillance detection as a means of proactively identifying terrorist activity. Surveillance detection identifies intent and in turn, allows for a preventative response as opposed to a reactionary response. Surveillance detection is equally effective in identifying threats against facilities as well as threats to executives and other key persons.
Make surveillance detection a key component in your Executive Protection program.
Technorati Tags: executive protection, bodyguard, surveillance detection, counter surveillance, hostile surveillance, criminal surveillance, terrorism, counter terrorism, anti terrorism, physical security, Germany, Hanau, Federal Criminal Police, BKA,
Powered by ScribeFire.
