UNIVERSITY OF DAYTON RESEARCH INSTITUTE
Analyzing Terrorist Risk
Levels
An Alternative Methodology & Algorithmic
Framework
Wilson, Melody;Gaston, Cory
6/13/2013
United States security. This project explores a new methodology for identifying risk levels of potential
threats through a computational program. By using an algorithm to analyze a number of variables we
determine the risk level of a terrorist, terrorist group, or alleged terrorist organization. Variables include
but are not limited to: location, structure, membership, funding, region, ethnicity and capabilities.The
study of terrorist organizations is important to determine the full capacity in which a group can operate or
attack at any given time. An increase in the number of terrorist groups with a wide array of capabilities
and ideologies proliferate danger to
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................................ 2
INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................................................... 2
METHODOLOGY ......................................................................................................................... 3
Variable Diagram ........................................................................................................................ 4
Weighting .................................................................................................................................... 4
VARIABLES .................................................................................................................................. 5
Variable Spreadsheet ................................................................................................................... 5
Independent Variables ................................................................................................................. 6
Regions .................................................................................................................................... 6
Structure................................................................................................................................... 6
Support..................................................................................................................................... 7
Funding .................................................................................................................................... 8
Current & Past Conflicts.......................................................................................................... 8
Membership ............................................................................................................................. 9
Capabilities .............................................................................................................................. 9
Affiliation .............................................................................................................................. 10
Ideology ..................................................................................Error! Bookmark not defined.
Co-Dependent Variables ........................................................................................................... 11
PROGRAM ................................................................................................................................... 12
Targets: ...................................................................................................................................... 12
User Input: ................................................................................................................................. 12
Program Ex. 1............................................................................................................................ 13
Program Ex. 2............................................................................................................................ 13
Coding/Output Screen Shots ..................................................................................................... 14
Output:....................................................................................................................................... 17
Limitation of Program: .............................................................................................................. 17
CONCLUSION ............................................................................................................................. 18
BIBLIOGRAPHY ......................................................................................................................... 19
1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Advancements in U.S. defense capabilities and intelligence have caused an increase in the
emphasis on technology and education in the terrorist realm. These progressions have made it
more challenging to protect the United States from immediate threats. Advancements in terrorist
capabilities produce an increased demand for new ways to interpret data and meet these new
challenges. Our goal is to deliver an alternative approach to analyzing terrorist networks through
quantifying qualitative data analysis and computer science.
Our computer program, the Terrorist Risk Level Program (TRLP), provides a way to catalog
threat levels of terrorist/ terrorist organizations by analyzing characteristics and risk factors
through a novel process that combines analytical reasoning and computer computations. The
program uses an algorithm and weighted variables to calculate the probability in which a group’s
capabilities can affect U.S. national security. Characteristics of groups are analyzed by weighing
how each variable acts independently and, when relevant, co-dependently to enable the abilities
of groups.
A strong feature of this program is its ability to optimize large amounts of information by
analyzing the key components that make terrorists dangerous. We do this by weighing the impact
of critical components that aid in the abilities of terrorist networks. Assigning weighted factors
allows for establishing importance as it relates to the impact of risk levels and priorities. In the
final assessment, these weighted variables become a part of the calculation used to determine an
accurate overall rating of a given organization. By simplifying the process of identifying a
network or person’s risk level, the program enables the user to prioritize the importance of such
groups based upon projected analysis.
Nevertheless, this program is not intended to replace the analyst but to assist in cyphering
through the nuances of infinite data and resources regarding the expectations of a terrorist group,
person, or organization. This program can be useful to policymakers and analysts as a tool of
reference for identifying terrorist risk levels.
Improvements to the program are recommended in data storage after running the process, adding
more dynamics to factors being analyzed, and also exploring different alternatives for calculation
and weighting. The primary limitation of this program stems from the knowledge level of the
user on the specific terrorist group. In other words, if the user is not informed or well aware of
information regarding the terrorist factors being analyzed it can cause miscalculation or skewed
perception of risk level. Another significant limitation could be over reliance on the software by
the analyst.
INTRODUCTION
Although there is no universally accepted definition of terrorism, it is important to understand
what it is and how it is perceived in order to counter terrorist acts on a national as well as
2
international level. 1,2 According to U.S. federal code, terrorism is defined as “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.”3
Unfortunately, identifying terrorist organizations is a challenging task with consideration of the
commonly used saying, "One man's terrorist is another's freedom fighter.”4,5 According to the
U.S. Army handbook, “A Military Guide to Terrorism in the Twenty-First Century”:
The threat of terrorism to the U.S. is present across the entire spectrum of conflict. The
use of terrorism ranges from individual acts of wanton damage or destruction to property
or person, to highly sophisticated operations conducted by organized extremist groups
with social, environmental, religious, economic, or political agendas. Any of these
terrorist activities can have significant negative impact on the conduct of missions by
U.S. military forces.6
As a result of increased terrorist threats, the U.S. has used countless resources to develop new
technologies that have the ability to aid the country in global security efforts. Nevertheless, as
the years have passed, there has been a significant interest in the increase of terrorist
organizations and alleged persons with the intent to harm the U.S. Studies show that between the
years of 1970 and 2011, the United States experienced a total of 2,608 attacks and 226 of those
attacks were fatal. 7 Preventing incidents such as those encountered during the September 11th
attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon fuel many government intelligence and
security agencies to stay on the cutting edge of technology in science, cyber, and military tactics.
Due to the increase in terrorist groups with the intent to harm the United State we developed
TRLP to assist in aiding the US government, analyst and policymakers when analyzing possible
terrorist risk levels.
METHODOLOGY
According to the FBI: “One of the most effective weapons in the prevention of terrorist attacks
involves the gathering, analysis, and dissemination of intelligence and the full integration of that
intelligence into investigations, operations, and crisis response.”8 Thus, different tools and
research play critical roles in predicting motives of terrorist, threat levels, and intentions in our
methodology.
1
(Terrorism, 97)
(Terrorism Research)
3
(Plumer, 2013)
4
(What is Terrorism and Who Defines It?, 2013)
5
(Terrorism FAQ - Terrorism.com, 2012)
6
(PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models)
7
(Plumer, 2013)
8
(FBI)
2
3
In order to reduce bias, research was extracted from various sources such as government
agencies, encyclopedias, reputable news sources, non-profit organizations (think tanks/research
institutions) and scholarly articles to determine variables that associate terrorists with threats to
the United States. The findings were analyzed, strategically assembled, weighted then compiled
into charts based upon connections and significance.
With easily accessible information, we constructed a computer program to determine the risk
level of a specified terrorist group’s probability to attack the United States. We achieved this by
collecting comprehensive information from the user relating to an organization, in which our
program presents the risk level to be “Low”, “Medium”, “High” or “Extremely High.” Projected
outputs are determined by the scoring/points a group or person receives once the variable weight
values and algorithm are calculated.
C++, an intermediate programming software, was used to write the coding for TRLP. By using
C++, we were able optimize our findings based upon analyzed variables that are calculated using
a linear algorithm. Variables refer but are not limited to: Ideology, Regions, Funding, Affiliation,
Membership, Support and Structure.
Variable Diagram
Weighting
When constructing an overall scale based on several variables, there is consideration that some
of the variables are deemed more important than others. Weighting variables when adding
4
several in scale construction allows some of them to be given more weight based upon a variety
of considerations. The simplest accumulation of variables with equal weights may be regarded as
unfair when concluding that more important factors should be given more weight.
These weights for given variables in this project arise from the data acquired through various
procedures. Procedures involve factor analysis, which reduces a number of observed variables to
a smaller number of underlying "factors", and each observed variable has a different weight
towards each underlying factor. For example, the capabilities of a terrorist group or person(s) is
weighted based on underlying factors such as weaponry, training, and technology which may
impact the terrorist risk level by increasing the weight if a group possess a given factor.
Qualitative data encompasses 83% of the factors being used to analyze the terrorist risk level.
Quantitative data only accounts for 12% of the entire information gathered. In order to use the
information from both data sets, everything had to be weighted with the intention of producing a
numerical value that could be calculated into the final algorithm. The weighting of each
individual variable allowed each factor to be represented on a scale of 1 to 5; with 1 being the
lowest and 5 being the highest score obtainable.
VARIABLES
A total of 24 variables are used within the project to identify factors that play a role in increasing
the ability of a terrorist group or person to attack the United States. 10 of these variables operate
independently to impact the risk level, and the other 14 variables function as subcategories or
codependent factors whose impact are influenced or influences that of the independent variable it
is associated with. Below is a chart that summarizes the list of variables, definitions, and
weights.
Variable Spreadsheet
**SHADED content denotes independent variables**
Variable
Region
Structure
Hierarchal
Network
Chain Network
Hub/Star Network
All-Channel
Network
Description
Location of group/person
How things are set-up; How orders are
given/received
All entities in organization are subordinate except
one. There is hierarchy in the chain of command.
More social, decentralized, and flexible. Has a wide
span of control. Many interconnected groups.
Linear flow of information and commands.
Many networks interconnected and filtering
through one central point of command.
Many interconnected groups which the flow of
command/information coming from multiple cells.
Weight
6
9
3
5
3
4
5
5
Support
Government
Funding
Government Aid
Civilian/Popular
Funding
Current Conflicts
Past Attacks
Membership
Size
Recruitment
Capabilities
Training
Weapons
Technology
Affiliations
Societal Influences
Culture
Backing of groups that sustains the livelihood of
group/persons abilities and resources
Financial backing from government
8
Aid such as weapons, resources, etc.
Acceptance from community/civilian population
Financing consisting of the funds the cell needs to
live and to plan, train for, and commit the terrorist
act.
Current issues post 2010
Attacks on the US prior to 2010
Who’s a part/ How many/ Why are they important
Known/ Anticipated size of group
Methods/ Status of members/Education
Skills, aptitudes, and proficiencies the group/person
has acquired or offers.
Training camps/ preparation for recruits
Bombs, guns, WMD, etc.
Advanced capabilities
Connected networks/enablers
Philosophy/ values of group or person(s)
Nature of their surroundings/Norms/extremes
5
2
5
5
3
2
4
1-5
5
10
3
5
5
7
1
1-5
Independent Variables
Independent variables in this program are those deemed most important from acquired and
analyzed information gathered during research. There are 10 independent variables, ranked on a
scale of 1 to 10, based on the order of importance. This ranking provides a scalar for each
variable that will be incorporated into the actual weight of the independent variable being
assessed. For example, an independent variable with the ranking of 5 has a scalar of 5 for its
calculation.
Regions
The location of a group or person can provide insight for evaluating outlooks toward the United
States as well as judging the level of hostility of groups in a particular region. Geographic
location can influence a group or person based upon stigmas that are imposed by the
surroundings, economic standing, or government structure.
Structure
Association between or among terrorist groups increase their capabilities through the exchange
of knowledge and other resources. With these common goals it allowed religions or organization
to create affiliations and build several different structure types which increase their power, reach
and capabilities. Simultaneously, it reduces sectarian conflict amongst the different religious
6
sects. There are two basis models of organizational structures of terrorist organizations;
hierarchical and network structure with network structure having a variety of types. 9
Hierarchical structure organizations are those that have a well-defined vertical chain of
command, control, and responsibility. In this type of structure, there will be specialized areas
among the organization such as support, operations and intelligence. Usually the cell (individual
group within the structure) leader will have acknowledgement of the other cells involved and
their role. Each cell within the structure will have a particular political, social, or economic
objective.
Network structure is a little more complex and more prevalent in today’s organizations. A
network distributes the responsibility for operations and plan for redundancies of key functions.
As mentioned there are various types of network structures; the basic types are chain, hub/star,
and all channel.
Chain is designed so that each cell (group) is linked to the node in a sequence for a continuous
link of communication; this is designed for smuggling goods, people or laundering money.10 Hub
and Star network structure communication is directed at one central cell, not necessarily a leader
or decision maker. It gives them the ability to communicate with the other cells; this structure is
primary in financial or economic networks. All channel structure poses security risk considering
all channels are connected and there is no command structure above it. The commands are
distributed throughout the entire network with a continuous flow of communication; this enables
the feasibility of directing orders.
Support
The U.S. Department of State has recognizes how state supported terrorist groups increase
possibility of attack to the United States. For example, despite its pledge to support the
stabilization of Iraq, in 2011 Iran continued to provide lethal support including: weapons,
training, funding, and guidance to Iraqi Shia militant groups that targeted U.S. and Iraqi forces.11
It is important to understand there are different levels and participation of State support for
terrorist groups. Other variable are critical in accessing the chance of attacks although the level
of support does increase the risk levels.
Non-state supported terrorist groups that operate autonomously, receiving no significant support
from any government. In general these groups will hold no major threat. Other variables are
important in accessing their intentions and discontent with the United States.
State sponsorship of terrorism, also known as "state supported" terrorism, is when governments
provide supplies, training, and other forms of support to non-state terrorist organizations.12 These
groups are often very dangerous and can be compared to organizations such as Hamas and
9
PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models
PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models
11
(Bureau of Counterterrorism, 2012)
12
(Countries with Large Terrorist Presence)
10
7
Hezbollah, who are supported by foreign governments, specifically Syria and Iran. 13,14 Other
factors are important include moral values, culture and other practices which can act as risk
amplifiers.
Funding
Terrorist financing refers to the processing of funds to sponsor, facilitate or supply terrorists with
resources to carry out their attacks.15,16 A terrorist group, like any other criminal organization,
builds and maintains an infrastructure to facilitate the development of sources of funding, to
channel those funds to the providers of materials and or services to the organization. Terrorist
organizations accumulate income from a variety of sources, often combining both lawful and
unlawful practices.
Financial support can be in the form of donations, community solicitation, and other fundraising
initiatives; this can derive from states, large organizations, or from individual donations. For
example, some countries require a percent of income to go charities which, knowingly or
unknowingly, are used for funding terrorist organizations.17 On other occasions wealthy antiAmerican individuals will propagate criminal activities by funding terrorism. Other revenue
generating activities include kidnapping, extortion, smuggling, fraud, diamond trading or real
estate investment.
There are many avenues that terrorist organizations take to generate income, thus increase their
strength by supplying them the resources they need to carry out their objectives. The ability they
have to accumulate income provides organizations opportunities to begin tackling some of their
operational and technical challenges. Well-funded terrorist groups have the ability to create and
distribute chemical and biological weapons, to injure or kill a larger amount of individuals.
Current & Past Conflicts
Past and current conflicts play a critical role in identifying the intent of terrorist organizations.
Understanding past events and the way a group or terrorist acted in the past can support the
analysis in determining the probability of future threats.
When taking into consideration the impact of past actions on the influence of possible future
conflicts or those taking place currently, we keep in mind that the terrorist realm is ever
changing. Constant advancements in this arena make it more challenging to declare that events
or actions in the past will influence or impact their actions in the future. For this reason
weighting of these variable in our program account for less than what we originally expected.
The understanding of a central/common belief has shifted operational intensity from traditional
sources of terrorism; state sponsors and formalized terrorist organizations, to loosely affiliated
extremists. Greater cooperation among terrorist groups since the 1993 World Trade Center
13
(Bureau of Counterterrorism, 2012)
(Countries with Large Terrorist Presence)
15
(International Monetary Fund, 2013)
16
(Fidis, 2009)
17
(IAGS, 2004)
14
8
bombing have produces homegrown extremists with seeming links to larger organizations.18
Theses links and affiliations can be associated with ongoing conflicts from anti-American
theologies.
Membership
The impact of a group’s membership is not solely based upon how large a group may be. In
some cases, smaller membership sizes are more effective than larger groups because of their
tight cohesion and ability to alleviate multiple focuses and stay on the same page. Smaller groups
or individuals can also play on the fact that they are harder to pin point as opposed to groups that
are well known or with larger membership sizes. Advantages of larger groups can also be
argued based upon their high numbers. Larger groups can inflict larger terrorist acts, reach more
sources through multiple affiliations and still maintain operation if one person or cell is
eliminated. For these reasons, large and small groups are weighted relatively equally.
Regardless of the size, education tends to play a significant role in the effectiveness of any
membership size. While poverty and ignorance represent most terrorist organizations, it is
important to recognize that the education level of members in these groups makes a significant
difference. Education increase risk levels and these organizations now have the ability to make
connections with military officers, well-educated people abroad and scientists.19
For example, Lashkar-e-Taiba, is one of the world's most dangerous militant organizations,
according to a study done by the Combating Terrorism Center at the U.S. Military Academy in
West Point, N.Y. This particular group has ascended as a military organization despite its antiU.S. beliefs and many terrorist attacks in the Pakistan region; this is due to the well-organized,
educated individuals, tactical strategies and influential leader that drive the group. Education has
made a significant difference in the fact it has helped recruitment, assisted with connections and
helped Hafiz Saeed (founder of Lashkar-e-Taiba) avoid imprisonment.
Capabilities
Capabilities are an important asset to consider when addressing the dangers of terrorism towards
the United States and other nations. Capabilities in combination with other variables such as
government support, structure and beliefs system will increase the chance of attacks toward the
United States. These mixtures of capabilities can increase their strength, knowledge and reach of
the organization. Listed below are some important capabilities that increase the risk of attacks to
the United State and a description to highlight the importance.
The weaponry and equipment (weapons) available is an important part of any capabilities
assessment of organizations that use violence.20 Terrorists use a broad range of weapons.
Virtually any type of firearm can be employed, as well as a wide variety of improvised explosive
devices and conventional military munitions adapted for use in specific operational missions. In
combination with the beliefs and other capabilities can make this asset a very dangerous
18
(Mueller III, 2013)
(Rotella, 2013)
20
(PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models)
19
9
commodity for terrorist groups. In future versions of the program we hope to take these
variations into account.
Training proliferation of expertise and technology enables terrorist groups to obtain particular
skills. In addition to the number of terrorists and terror groups that are willing and available to
exchange training with one another, there are also experts in the technical, scientific, operational,
and intelligence fields willing to provide training or augment operational capabilities on a
contract basis.21 This type of expert training makes a group more efficient and dangerous.
Affiliation
Association between or among terrorist groups increase their capabilities through the exchange
of knowledge and other resources. It is imperative to understand that terrorists are increasingly
using a broader system of networks than previously experienced. Groups based on political or
nationalistic agendas are becoming more synchronized because of common goals and the
strength in numbers (affiliation) and technological reach brings organizations closer together.
Technological advances can make networks more effective and reduced means such as couriers,
paper messages, and landline telephones can enable networks to avoid detection and operate
effectively in certain circumstances; which broaden the ability of affiliations to organize. 22
For example, affiliation was depicted during the death of Bin Laden, notice the follow
countries/individuals that had links to al-Qaeda. Bin Laden was not the only top al-Qaeda leader
who was removed from the battlefield in 2011.23 In June, Ilyas Kashmiri, one of the most
capable terrorist operatives in South Asia, was killed in Pakistan. Also in June, Harun Fazul, an
architect of the 1998 U.S. Embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania, and the foremost member
of al-Qaeda in East Africa, was killed in Somalia by the Transitional Federal Government. In
August 2011, Atiya Abdul Rahman, al-Qaeda’s second-in-command after bin Ladin’s death and
a senior operational commander, was killed in Pakistan. In September, Anwar al-Aulaqi, alQaeda in the Arabian Peninsula’s chief of external operations, was killed in Yemen.
Societal Influences
It is important to understand that ethnicity or birth does not necessarily predetermine the choice
of individuals or their behavior. People have a choice of identity and philosophical beliefs, and in
this study we explore the impact of belief practices as it relates to terrorism. Although ethnic
background increases the risk of exposer, it is the combination of other variables that make this
attribute more prevalent; a combination of culture, religion and ideology.
The culture of society surrounding the group can predicate social norms, grievances against other
groups (US), and potentially increase hostilities of the groups/person(s). Understanding the
nature of the society in which a group stems from can provide essential information in
determining hostility levels and views of the US. Nevertheless, the ethnicity of a region or group
does not determine the risk level in our project; however, underlying factors such as common
21
(PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models)
(U.S. Army, 2007)
23
(Bureau of Counterterrorism, 2012)
22
10
practices and known oppositions will impact the output. Some recent literature exploring the
causes and consequences of terrorism finds that the probability of a country being victimized by
terrorist groups is positively related to measures of the target country’s ethnic, linguistic and
religious fractionalization.24 So in connection with ethnicity and ideology the allegiance of U.S.
citizens to western belief increases the risk of attack in the U.S.
Ideological beliefs along with cultural and religious influences had a huge impact on motivating
the terrorist in one of the deadliest attack on U.S. soil, September 11th. This attack was
orchestrated by Osama Bin Laden who practiced jihad and followed the governance of Sharia
Law.25 With that in consideration, it is important to understand Jihad intentional message is
exerting of one’s power in repelling the enemy.26 With Sharia law violence increases because
those groups usually practice Jihad which has a stricter law. Countries practicing interpretations
of Sharia law that promotes violence or terrorist-like philosophies pose a real threat to the United
States because their law is unlike any in the world and is composed of many death sentences on
various practices which opposing Sharia law.27 While we generally look into Sharia Law due to
its association with many of the most dangerous terrorist organization, this variable also includes
other ideologies ranging between extreme nationalism to racism.
Al Qaeda may not possess the organizational strength it had years ago, but its ideology perhaps
gained more strength as its philosophy inspires new recruits; many outside the Arab world.28 As
mentioned above it begins articulating a set of constraints of Muslim world brought on by the
west (U.S.) and its Jewish allies; which they declare a global conspiracy to destroy Islam. This
ideology persuades them to fight out of conviction not monetary gain, which accounts for their
radical membership and threat to the U.S.
Co-Dependent Variables
Co-dependent variables are those that are subgroups of a larger variable within the chart. These
variables, in most cases, operate only if the group or person possesses the independent variable it
is associated with. It is very seldom, within this program, that the co-dependent variables impact
the risk level of a terrorist, terrorist network, or organization exclusively without collaboration of
another variable. These subgroups are important in determining the actual weight of a variable
because they are multiplied by scalars to produce a more accurate rate/value.
24
(Basuchoudhar & Shughart II, 2007)
(Kershaw, 2012)
26
(Ahmad)
27
(Sharia Law - Sharia Law Exposed)
28
PDF Strategic Ideology of Al Qaeda, IPRI Journal XIII, no.1 (Winter 2013): 1-12, Sye Manzar Abbas Zaidi
25
11
PROGRAM
This program is comprised of researched variables weighted to display a specific value
depending on the level of significance pertaining to the likelihood of terrorist attack. Each
individual variable result is added to other tested/researched variable to display a cumulative
result. This result represents the risk level of a specific group’s likelihood to attack the United
States.
Targets:
The program focuses on terrorist organizations that represent threats to United States national
security; these could be known terrorist organizations or newly formed organizations. The
program also has the ability to analyze individual targets/persons according to the information
inputs.
User Input:
Specific questions are asked pertaining to the organization being analyzed. The more information
users know regarding the organization will more accurately depict the risk level of threat,
concerning that specific organization. The impact of results from given questions were
12
previously researched and analyzed to provide variables with weights in association to thier
impact on risk levels.
Program Ex. 1
The process for a yes or no question is shown below. This is an example of how the program will
handle inputs from the user when the answer either in the affirmative or negative. In this process,
the program asks a question in which a user can respond yes or no, it retrieves the input and
determines the weight of the variable being analyzed by the question. Once the value is
determined, the program then calculates/adds the value into the algorithm.
Program Ex. 2
This example shows how the program will handle inputs from multiple choice questions. Once
the input is retrieved and the value is determined, the program then calculates/adds that value to
the algorithm.
13
Coding/Output Screen Shots
In the following images, the group “Al Qaeda” will be ran through the TRLP program. The
inputs are based upon information gathered on this particular group.
14
Boxes outlined in “RED” provide the source code for the operation of the program. In the black
program window you will see how the program displays the coding and collects the inputs
required to determine the total weight of each group or person. Total weight in the program is
represented in the program as “Total”.
As stated in previous sections, the program uses three types of questions to collect inputs from
the user. These questions consist of multiple choice, yes/ no, and “Fill-in the blank type
questions. Examples of these questions and their operations will be shown throughout the
following screen shots.
The images below show the process of determining and calculating the weight of a group or
person’s location. On the left, the program prompts the user to select the region in which a group
or person is located. The coding on the right shows how the program goes through a series of
arguments to determine which one will correspond to the selection.
15
16
Output:
After a comprehensive description of the organization from questions presented in the program,
the end result displays the possibility of attack in a low, medium, high and extremely high
scheme. As previously explained the resulting prediction is reached based upon existing
knowledge of organizations in responses to questions.
Limitation of Program:
One of the major limitations of this program is trying to quantify qualitative data which
inevitably results in bias when taking into consideration the impact of risk levels.
Input is limited to specific questions asked in the program resulting from research our team
analyzed and determined significant. Research was gathered from various resources and similar
research may result in conflicting risk factors, variable or weight depending on analyst. Scales
of weighted variables may vary depending on analysis, sources of data or level of importance.
17
CONCLUSION
The Terrorist Risk Level Program (TRLP) explores a new methodology for identifying risk
levels of terrorist networks and provides a way to optimize extensive information on alleged
terrorist groups or persons. This program uses an algorithm and weighted variables to calculate
the probability in which a group’s capabilities can affect US national security. Thus, a group or
person’s characteristics are analyzed on how they can enable the abilities of possible terrorist and
risk levels. With easily accessible information and analysis, we be believe TRLP can be a
computer program that can help policymakers and analyst determine risk levels of a specified
terrorist group and their probability of attacking the United States
Finalizing the program posed many challenges due to a combination of software capabilities and
an abundance of information. We are aware that there are more factors that may be deemed
critical to related studies in determining potential attacks and thus the variables represented in the
program are those in which parallel to our research but are not limited to all the factors
associated with terrorist organizations. Our future work will consist of expanding TRLP to store
and update information in future uses and also we improving the algorithm used to calculate the
risk level output. Enhancements to the TRLP program framework by professionals in analysis
fields, mathematics, and terrorist studies can provide more validity and possibly increase the
correlation between the group/person(s) being analyzed and algorithmic output.
This study and project is ongoing and intends to develop a product that will assist in analyzing
terrorist situations and ultimately protect the United States military, citizens, and country from
terrorist threats. If properly used and with accurate information inputs we feel that the future of
this product will increase the United States’ abilities of preventions and counter-terrorism.
18
BIBLIOGRAPHY
(n.d.). PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models.
IAGS. (2004). Retrieved June 5, 2013, from iags.org: http://www.iags.org/fuelingterror.html
Fidis. (2009). Retrieved June 5, 2013, from fidis.net: http://www.fidis.net/resources/deliverables/identityof-identity/int-d2200/doc/27/
Terrorism FAQ - Terrorism.com. (2012, October 29). Retrieved April 15, 2013, from
www.terrorism.com: http://www.terrorism.com/2012/10/29/terrorism-faq/
International Monetary Fund. (2013, March 31). Retrieved June 5, 2013, from imf.org:
http://www.imf.org/external/np/exr/facts/aml.htm
What is Terrorism and Who Defines It? (2013). Retrieved May 5, 2013, from about.com:
http://terrorism.about.com/od/whatisterroris1/u/What_Is_Terrorism.htm%20-%20s2
Terrorism. (97, May 13). Retrieved April 1, 2013, from www.towson.edu:
http://www.towson.edu/polsci/ppp/sp97/terror/intro.html
Ahmad, S. (n.d.). True Spirit of Jihad. Retrieved Apirl 22, 2013, from The Lahore Ahmadiyya
Movement: http://www.muslim.org/islam/jihad.htm
Basuchoudhar, A., & Shughart II, W. F. (2007). On Ethnic Conflict and the Origins of Terrorism.
Bureau of Counterterrorism. (2012, July 31). Retrieved April 6, 2013, from U.S. Department of State:
http://www.state.gov/j/ct/rls/crt/2011/195540.htm
Bureau of Counterterrorism. (2012). Country Reports on Terrorism 2011. US Department of State.
Countries with Large Terrorist Presence. (n.d.). Retrieved May 4, 2013, from Terrorism Research:
http://www.terrorism-research.com/state/countries.php
FBI, U. D. (n.d.). FBI-Terrorism 2002/2005. Retrieved May 5, 2013, from www.fbi.gov:
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/terrorism-2002-2005
Global Focus. (n.d.). Retrieved June 15, 2013, from globalfocus.org: http://www.globalfocus.org/GFTerrorism.htm
Kershaw, T. (2012, June 26). Osama Bin Laden's Religion and Political Views. Retrieved May 23, 2013,
from http://hollowverse.com/osama-bin-laden/
Mueller III, R. S. (2013, June 13). The FBI. Retrieved June 18, 2013, from fbi.gov:
http://www.fbi.gov/news/testimony/addressing-diverse-threats-to-our-nation-while-preservingcivil-liberties
(n.d.). PDF A military guide to terrorism in the Twenty-First Century-Terrorist Organization Models.
19
Plumer, B. (2013, April 16). Eight facts about terrorism in the United States. Retrieved May 1, 13, from
Washingtonpost.com: http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/04/16/eightfacts-about-terrorism-in-the-united-states/
Rotella, S. (2013, April 4). Terror Group Recruits From Pakistan’s ‘Best and Brightest’. Retrieved April
6, 2013, from Pro Publica: terror-group-recruits-from-pakistans-best-and-brightest
Sharia Law - Sharia Law Exposed. (n.d.). Retrieved May 20, 2013, from
http://www.billionbibles.org/sharia/sharia-law.html
Terrorism Research. (n.d.). Retrieved May 5, 2013, from www.terrorism-research.com:
http://www.terrorism-research.com/
U.S. Army. (2007, August 15). Retrieved May 10, 2013, from au.af.mil:
http://www.au.af.mil/au/awc/awcgate/army/guidterr/ch03.pdf
20