The Key to Investigating the Paris Terrorist Attacks, Preventing Future Attacks, and Responding to the Migrant Crisis

November 18, 2015 | Brainwave Science


iCognative in Counterterrorism: The Key to Investigating the Paris Terrorist Attacks, Preventing Future Attacks, and Responding to the Migrant Crisis
November 18, 2015 | Brainwave Science


The recent bloody terrorist attacks in Paris are the latest crimes in a series of escalating attacks against innocent civilians in Western countries. The current migrant crisis has made the world a much more dangerous place. The influx of tens of thousands of migrants, including an untold number of terrorists, has highlighted a critical lack in past counterterrorism, counterintelligence, and law enforcement capabilities: Authorities have been unable to distinguish between terrorists and innocents until it is too late and the terrorists have carried out their terrorist attacks. Since the terrorist attacks of 9/11, the same scenario has been repeated over and over again in Western countries:


Authorities are aware of a terrorist suspect, but they lack sufficient evidence of his terrorist affiliations, capabilities, and/or plans to take action, until it is too late. The recent terrorist attacks in Paris have followed this same pattern. US intelligence agencies had information on four of the Paris terrorists’ suspects, but lacked sufficient evidence to take action. “These people were known to us, known to be involved in terrorist activity, known to be people who needed to be scrutinized,” Senate Select Committee on Intelligence member Sen. James Risch told CNN. “In 2010, [Paris terrorist suspect Omar Ismail] Mostefai had been the subject of a [French] police ‘S’ file for radicalization but the state prosecutor said he had never been implicated in any case of a terrorist organization. Several homegrown terrorists before him had previously been the subject of the same kind of police file before later carrying out horrific attacks, including Mohamed Merah who carried out a gun attack on a Jewish school in Toulouse in 2012 after deadly attacks on soldiers, and Cherif Kouachi, who carried out the Charlie Hebdo attacks with his brother.”

“[French] Police stopped [Paris terrorist suspect] Salah Abdeslam hours after the attacks in a car on his way toward the Belgian border. They let him go because he apparently hadn’t yet been linked to the terrorist operation.”

“[Female Paris suicide bomber] Hasna Aitboulahcen, reportedly the woman who blew herself up in a police raid in Saint-Denis on Wednesday, was known by French intelligence to have “offered her services to commit terrorist attacks in France”, according to iTele citing police sources. Aitboulahcen, a cousin of Abdelhami Abaaoud, the suspected mastermind of last Friday’s Paris attacks, had been under ‘triple surveillance’ from French intelligence, judges and the police for drugs running and terror probes.”

Belgian counterterrorism authorities also were aware of at least three of the suspects before they struck, but like the Americans, they lacked sufficient evidence to take action. “Belgian federal prosecutor Eric Van Der Sypt said the Abdeslam brothers and Hadfi were known to Belgian authorities before Friday.”

“Salah Abdeslam and at least two other key suspects were on Belgian authorities’ radar before Friday…In February, Belgian investigators questioned and released two brothers linked to the attacks, Ibrahim and Salah Abdeslam, prosecutor Eric Van der Sypt said.”

“[Paris terrorist suspect] Ibrahim [Abdeslam]tried to go to Syria and was sent back by the Turks in the beginning of 2015,” Van der Sypt told CNN. “It was after that we questioned him.” Investigators released Ibrahim and his brother Salah Abdeslam in February after they denied they wanted to go to Syria.

The Paris terrorist attack and other recent terror attacks in Europe have followed the same pattern that took place in previous attacks in the US, Europe, and elsewhere. The perpetrators of many of the most destructive terrorist acts have been known to counterterrorism and law enforcement agencies before they struck, but authorities have lacked sufficient evidence to take effective action until it was too late and the planned death and destruction had already taken place.

The perpetrators of major terrorist attacks on US soil were known to counterterrorism authorities, and suspected of terrorist connections or plans, before they committed their crimes. These include:
The 9/11 terrorists;
The Fort Hood shooter; and
The Boston Marathon bombers.

In each case, however, authorities lacked sufficient objective evidence to take action to prevent the terrorist acts.

The same scenario has been repeated in many of the recent terrorist attacks in Europe. These include:
The Charlie Hebdo terrorists (January 2015);
The Copenhagen shooter (February 2015);
The perpetrator of the beheading near Lyon, France (July 2015);
The Toulouse and Montauban shooter (March, 2012)
The Jewish Museum of Belgium shooter (May 2014);
The Amsterdam-Paris train gunman (August 2015).


Brainwave Science – a thought leader at the forefront of emerging and sophisticated technology is pleased to offer Specific Screening of terrorists through iCognative as part of its suite of products. iCognative provides a scientific solution to the fundamental problem in counterterrorism: distinguishing between terrorists from innocents, before the terrorists’ strike.

“In every case apparently the counter terrorism and law enforcement agencies have lacked one critical capability: an objective means to distinguish between terrorists and innocent people, before the terrorists’ strike. Terrorists know who they are. They know what terrorist affiliations they have. They have inside information at least of their own terrorist plans, and often of secret information regarding a more extensive terrorist organization or network. They know what terrorist training they have. They know what specific terrorism-related skills, such as firearms and bomb making, they possess. They know what terrorist activities they have perpetrated in the past, and they know the details of the terrorist activities they plan for the future. All of this information is stored in their brains,” said Krishna Ika President and CEO of Brainwave Science.

“If all of this information were stored in their laptop computers, distinguishing terrorists from innocents would be easy. Authorities could simply scan the suspected terrorists’ hard drives, detect the incriminating information, and know what the terrorists already know: who they are, what they have done, and what they have planned. Terrorists do not, however, generally make the mistake of storing this information on their computers or writing it down where it can be detected. This information is stored in their brains, where authorities have been unable to detect it. As a result of authorities’ inability to detect this information, the perpetrators of all of the above terrorist attacks were able to remain undetected until they had perpetrated their planned murder and destruction – despite the fact that they were suspected terrorists. iCognative technology is a perfect solution where traditional and existing systems fail for lack of sufficient evidence” he added.

The fundamental difference between the perpetrator of a terrorist act or crime and an innocent person is that the perpetrator, having committed the crime, has the specific knowledge of the crime stored in his brain. An innocent suspect does not. Similarly, a terrorist mastermind or trained terrorist has specific terrorism-related knowledge stored in his brain. This is what iCognative testing detects, scientifically and accurately.

“Authorities can utilize the iCognative system to determine if an individual’s memory contains specific knowledge of any fact or situation, such as the details of a crime scene, bomb-making knowledge, or the inner workings of a terrorist organization. When those activities, or items associated with those activities, are recognized by the individual, months or even years later, the brain emits the involuntary response known as a P300. This brain response is a thoroughly researched neurological event that has been well documented over more than 25 years in scientific literature. iCognative technology has been used in hundreds of tests in both real-life situations and laboratory conditions,” said Larry Farwell Chief Scientist at Brainwave Science. For national security, counterterrorism, and law enforcement, this testing detected information related to two different types of activities:
participation in a specific incident, or a particular crime.
participation in a specific type of training or inside knowledge of a specific field.

iCognative scientifically, accurately, and objectively detects what a subject knows or does not know regarding a crime, specific training or expertise, or other information of interest.