Could implementing Israeli airport security actually save Americans money?
I've been arguing for years that Americans would be safer at a lower cost if they adopted Israeli style airport security. Now, in a scathing indictment of the TSA and its creators (Congress with enhancements by the Obama administration), the same argument is being made by John Tierny.
It was the federal government, not the private screeners, that set
the policy allowing small knives and box cutters to be brought onto
planes. Federal guidelines prevented airlines from arming pilots and
reinforcing cockpit doors. The feds also stopped the private security
firms from using an existing system to identify high-risk passengers,
which would have singled out some of the hijackers for special
screening.
Instead of learning from those mistakes, the Senate doubled down on
central planning, voting unanimously to turn airport screening into a
federal monopoly. The only intelligent deliberation occurred in the
House of Representatives, where Republicans actually listened to experts
from countries with considerable experience in aviation terrorism.
Israel and European nations had learned the hard way that good security
requires a division of responsibility. An independent watchdog is
essential to ensure that screeners are doing their job, and the obvious
candidate for that role is the federal government. But that means that
someone else has to do the screening. The watchdog can’t watch itself.
House Republicans heeded the experts’ advice, and they had the votes
to trump House Democrats yearning for more federal workers. The House
passed a bill to establish a system modeled on the one used in Israel,
Canada, and Europe: each airport would run its own screening system, and
the feds would have wide authority to set standards, monitor
performance, and mandate improvements. When it came time to reconcile
the competing bills, however, Senate Democrats stood firm, and the House
Republicans were denounced for putting ideology above national
security. One of the loudest critics was New York Times columnist
Paul Krugman, who was such an ardent cheerleader for the TSA that he
deserves to have the line at Newark Airport named after him. “The
right’s fanatical distrust of government is the central fact of American
politics, even in a time of terror,” Krugman wrote. Exploiting the
public affection for firefighters after September 11, Krugman argued
that the Republicans’ anti-TSA ideology would logically call for the
elimination of the New York City Fire Department because fire protection
should be a purely private responsibility.
I actually part company with Tierny over the Europeans. In many ways, their security is worse than the Americans. First, like the Americans, they don't profile. Second, they don't screen their screeners well enough, with the result that their airport security is staffed by people who have gone on to commit terrorist attacks. Third, they don't take advantage of the possibility of keeping people with connecting flights in sterile areas, so they don't have to be re-screened. Instead, they throw you out of the sterile area (in many instances, even if you're changing planes in the same terminal), requiring you to go through security again.
Last month, I was 'randomly selected' at Paris-DeGaulle (despite only connecting there, and despite being an elite flyer and old enough not to fit anyone's terrorist profile) for 'extra screening' on my way to board a flight to Philadelphia. I was practically strip searched, and the idiot went through every one of the nearly 20 pockets in my backpack with obviously no clue of what it was he was supposed to look for.
So, no, I don't want a European system. I want an Israeli one where people who have training in psychology profile passengers instead of randomly picking people out of a line like me or like the lady at the top of this post.
Like all government monopolies, the TSA blames its failures on lack
of funding. But it’s already spending way too much, as demonstrated in a
congressional study
comparing TSA screeners in Los Angeles with non-TSA screeners in San
Francisco, one of the few airports allowed to run its own system,
contracting with a private company. If LAX switched to the San Francisco
model, the study concluded, it could cut its screening costs by more
than 40 percent.
The San Francisco private company’s screeners received the same
salary and benefits as TSA screeners, but they were so much better
trained and deployed that each one processed 65 percent more passengers
than a TSA screener in Los Angeles. They apparently enjoyed better
working conditions, too, because they were much less likely to quit
their jobs. And in tests by federal investigators, they were three times
better at detecting contraband.
As far as I am aware, Israel's system is all government run (although, come to think of it, I don't recall ever hearing that they went on strike, which all government unions do from time to time). But the key (other than the profiling) is that Israel's system has redundancy. They have more than one shot at catching terrorists. There's security before you ever get near the airport. If you arrive in a taxi, the security guard nearly always rolls down the window and asks where you're coming from - to hear your accent. If they're suspicious, the car is pulled over and searched. There's a security guard standing outside each door to the terminal, randomly pulling people over. You wait in a long line that moves VERY quickly to screen your checked baggage. Before they screen your checked baggage, they ask who packed it and where was it, and do you know why they're asking that question (Anne Murphy). They're looking for your manner (because they're trained in psychology) more than your answers. They always ask you if anyone gave you something to take with you. Usually, I just say no. A few months ago, I brought back a Torah scroll for someone and I spilled the beans to El Al (not Heathrow) security in London. They asked me who gave it to me and how well I knew the person. They were satisfied with my answers and let it go.
And then there's the security screening you're all used to abroad, which splits into 15-20 lines, most of which are not more than 10 minutes long. I usually get through all the security screening in 30-45 minutes and I have no priority status in Ben Gurion. That's no longer than anyplace else (one of the frequent excuses I hear why the Israeli system cannot be implemented elsewhere).
In Europe, when I'm not checking a bag, it takes about the same time (although in London that's only because I'm fast-tracked as an elite flyer with a British Airways partner - Heathrow is one of the worst airports in which to transfer if you have no privileges).
In the US, they don't screen checked bags until after they get them, and I get through security more quickly in most airports because (a) I'm an elite flyer (exception - Philadelphia where there's no such thing) or (b) I get TSA pre-cleared (always happens in Boston, usually in Chicago, rarely in Philadelphia).
TSA clearly needs to be reformed. It won't happen with Obama in power (he allowed them to unionize in 2011, which is what's preventing more airports from opting out) and it won't happen if Hillary Clinton wins the election either.
Breaking: Part of Amsterdam Schiphol Airport evacuated
Great.... Just great....
Amsterdam's Schiphol Airport has been evacuated in the last few minutes due to a possible bomb or suspicious package. It is still unclear what is going on.
The Leiden train station in Amsterdam has also been evacuated.
A section of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol has been evacuated after the arrest of a suspect, a spokesperson has told ITV News.
Social media users report armed police are patrolling the airport and hundreds of people have been evacuated from the commercial section.
Great.... Is there anyplace safe in Europe anymore?
UPDATE 5:31 PM BOSTON TIME
Three more updates at the same link:
1. A bomb disposal robot is investigating a suspicious package at Amsterdam Airport Schiphol, according to Airlive.
Pictures of the scene were shared on social media:
Hundreds have been evacuated from the commercial square in the airport and one person has been arrested, authorities say.
Air traffic has so far not been affected, the airport said.
2.Parts of Schiphol Airport remain closed following reports of a suspicious package.
The official Twitter account for the airport has tweeted that air traffic has 'not been affected' by the incident.
3.A section of Amsterdam Airport Schiphol has been evacuated following reports of a suspicious package.
One person has been arrested, a spokesperson for the airport has told ITV News.
So glad I fly through Europe....
UPDATE 6:19 PM BOSTON TIME
The Sheraton Hotel near the airport has also been evacuated and two more people have been arrested.
ALERT https://t.co/1jjhY4y8Qk Spokesman says Sheraton Hotel adjacent to Amsterdam airport also evacuated due to 'suspicious situation' - AFP
The Europeans are so totally clueless about airport security it's pathetic (not to mention that in many airports, you have to wonder whose side the security people are on).
Don't be surprised: 50 ISIS supporters work as baggage handlers in Brussels
This may come as a surprise to some of you, but for reasons I will explain later in this post, it doesn't surprise me at all. Quoting Brussels police, London's Daily Mail report that there at least 50 ISIS supporters working as baggage handlers at Brussels Airport.
In an astonishing open letter, the officers said they have warned about the terrorist sympathisers whose security badges give them access to planes, but they remain employed.
The airport police, who are threatening to go on strike because of security deficiencies, also said they have raised the issue of terrorists scouting the airport to plan possible attacks.
The extraordinary claims come after the Mail reported how the family of two of the bombers involved in the attacks last week said they had worked as cleaners at the airport.
‘Some people suspected of having fought in Syria came to the airport as “false tourists”.
We reported their presence but we do not know if anything was done with that information,’ the airport police wrote in their letter.
The officers said they had raised suspicions about certain staff members including those who apparently celebrated after the Paris attacks in November that killed 130 people.
‘When we checked these people, we were surprised more than once. It was men with a radical ideology and a long police history,’ the officers continued.
‘Even today, there are at least 50 supporters of the Islamic state who work at the airport. They have a security badge and have access to the cockpit of a plane.
‘In the past, a number of people had their badges revoked because they had IS sympathies. But clearly not everyone, especially in store personnel, cleaning services and baggage where we find the most suspicious people.’
Police raised concerns about inadequate security at the airport just four days before the attack took place.
The Belgian police union, NSPV, told the interior ministry on Friday 18 March that they would go on strike unless it was improved.
A disaster waiting to happen, God Forbid. So why am I not surprised at it? Long time readers may remember this story. I've mentioned many times on this blog my July 2003 conversation
with an El Al security person at London's Heathrow Airport, who told me
that since Heathrow employees were involved in a suicide bombing at Mike's Place in Tel Aviv in April 2003, El Al no longer trusts Heathrow security.
It's not just Heathrow. Until recently - and they may yet go back to it - if you arrived in Europe from the US on an American or European airline and you were connecting to El Al to go to Israel, you had to go down to the tarmac, claim your bags, open them and confirm to the security people that nothing had changed since you checked them in.
Two days after the Brussels attacks, I flew home to Israel from San Francisco. I won't say where I changed on the way, but I had about four hours in a European airport before boarding an El Al flight. I happened to sit down near my flight's gate before it was even posted, and I could hear El Al security speaking very conspicuously in Hebrew to someone down on the tarmac before the equipment arrived. It was clear to me that El Al is still doing its own security in Europe. I did not have to claim my bags in Europe.
Many Westerners are more scared of being labeled as illiberal or
nativist than they are of being unsafe.
Islamic terrorists sense that Westerners are increasingly materialist
rather than spiritual. Europeans in particular are becoming more
secular. Their birthrates are declining. And they seem to believe more
in satisfying their appetites than in finding transcendence through
children and religion.
As a result, jihadists trust that they can cull a handful of
Westerners every few weeks from an otherwise indifferent herd. Their
only challenge is to keep the harvest of Westerners down to a few dozen
and not to get greedy in their bloodlust.
Terrorists seem to believe that as long as they avoid another 9/11-like
massacre, they can continue to take lives and insidiously weaken the
West without awakening it from its morally indifferent slumber.
And they may be right.
And the American elites are similar to the European ones. 'Westerners' includes both Americans and Europeans. Read the whole thing.
Always helpful US State Department says 'Avoid Europe'
Greetings from a plane somewhere over flyover country. I left San Francisco this morning and am now heading for an East Coast stop where I'll board a plane to Europe. The US State Department doesn't want me to do that. Now they tell me. Just got this notice a few moments ago from the always helpful US Consulate in Jerusalem.
Europe Travel Alert
Last Updated: March 22, 2016
The State Department alerts U.S. citizens to potential risks of travel to and throughout Europe following several terrorist attacks, including the March 22 attacks in Brussels claimed by ISIL. Terrorist groups continue to plan near-term attacks throughout Europe, targeting sporting events, tourist sites, restaurants, and transportation. This Travel Alert expires onJune 20, 2016.
U.S. citizens should exercise vigilance when in public places or using mass transportation. Be aware of immediate surroundings and avoid crowded places. Exercise particular caution during religious holidays and at large festivals or events.
U.S. citizens should also:
Follow the instructions of local authorities, especially in an emergency.
Monitor media and local information sources and factor updated information into personal travel plans and activities.
Be prepared for additional security screening and unexpected disruptions.
Stay in touch with your family members and ensure they know how to reach you in the event of an emergency.
Register in our Smart Traveler Enrollment Program (STEP).
European governments continue to guard against terrorist attacks and conduct raids to disrupt plots. We work closely with our allies and will continue to share information with our European partners that will help identify and counter terrorist threats.
For further information:
Call1-888-407-4747toll-free in the United States and Canada or1-202-501-4444from other countries from8:00 a.m. to 8:00 p.m.Eastern Standard Time,MondaythroughFriday(except U.S. federal holidays).
Now if only these idiots would get out of Fantasyland and start fighting Islamic terrorism....
So for now, I will only tell you in general terms where I am changing planes and I won't give names of cities until after I leave them. Yes, it's come to this. #ThanksObama #DankeMerkel.
And a freilichen (Happy) Purim to those of you for whom it's already begun. Fortunately, since I'm a Jerusalemite and I am heading home, my Purim is tomorrow night.
Lesson from the Paris terror attacks: Europe needs to join forces with Israel
Greetings from somewhere over eastern Kentucky - my next stop (which is not my final stop today) is Dallas, Texas.
David Harris of the AJC (not necessarily a source from which I would expect it) has some very wise advice for Europe.
And finally, when will Europe finally wake up and realize that democratic Israel is part of the solution, not the problem?
At the end of the day, the terrorism faced by France - or Belgium,
Denmark, Germany, Spain, the U.K., etc. - is a kissing cousin of that
confronted by Israel. Some European leaders go to great lengths to deny
that obvious truth, seeking instead to draw distinctions that are, in
fact, largely non-existent, or suggesting that Israel somehow "deserves"
what it gets, while implying that Europe does not.
Let's get real.
The authors of 9/11 detested who and what America is. They didn't give a
darn what political party was in power, because they attacked the Twin
Towers when Clinton was president and again when Bush was in the Oval
Office.
The same with Europe. The target is Europe's value system - its democracy, openness, freedom, and secularism.
And, yes, the same with Israel. The terrorists of Hamas (with which the
Palestinian Authority made a pact), Iranian-backed Hezbollah, Islamic
Jihad, and ISIS don't want Israel to exist, period. They're not
interested in who's in power in Jerusalem or how to get to a two-state
accord, but rather establishing their rule over the entire land.
One would hope that this would at least awaken Europe enough to get them to cancel the 'settlement product' labeling. Don't hold your breath. It won't. Anti-Semitism trumps all.
Making matters significantly worse from the Israeli and European Jewish
perspective is Europe’s decision to allow the Army of the Guardians of
the Islamic Revolution, or the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps as
it usually called in the West, broad latitude to operate within the EU
starting in 2023.
“The EU delisting of IRGC military
organizations and personnel is tantamount to a green light for
Iran-sponsored terrorism. Likewise, the EU delisting of IRGC financial,
engineering, construction, energy and transport sector entities
amounts to European approval of the IRGC’s dominance in Iran’s economy,
which equates to the continued repression of the Iranian people by a
regime that just cashed in on temporarily deferring aspects of its
nuclear program,” Ali Alfoneh, an expert on the Revolutionary Guard, and
a fellow a the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, wrote.
Europe’s
media are not paying attention to some of the fine print in the
nuclear agreement that largely affects their citizen’s security as well
as that of Israel institutions across the continent.
Alfoneh
noted, “After the nuclear agreement signed last week, the United States
will maintain most of its sanctions on individuals and entities
connected to Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, the regime’s
elite forces for external terrorism and domestic repression. The
European Union, however, has chosen a different path: a mass delisting
of the Guards on the date the deal calls ‘Transition Day.’” Europe’s
“Transition Day” is to take place eight years after the agreement has
been formally implemented.
Alfoneh wrote, “barring unforeseen
circumstances [implementation] will occur at some point over the next
three months. On that day, the EU will delist the IRGC, as well as its
Air Force and Missile Command. Most unexpectedly, it will lift nuclear
sanctions on the Quds Force, the IRGC’s external arm tasked with
‘exporting the revolution’ and extending support to terrorist proxies.”
The
EU is slated to delist Iranian banks such as Ansar and Mehr , which
are under sanctions because of their nuclear proliferation and nuclear
weapons delivery activities. The EU did not object to delisting the
notorious Brig.-Gen. Mohammad Hejazi.
Hejazi is a former commander of the Basij militia, Alfoneh told The Jerusalem Post.
It's time for European Jews to leave the hostile continent. What could go wrong?
But Netanyahu is right
about one thing: The American president, who has his own political
reasons, is making a huge effort to convince the Iranians to sign –
sending them messages, letters and messengers and getting into an
argument with the Congress. But Barack Obama is actually causing his own
failure. He wants the goods so much that he has already put all the
cards on the table, while the Iranians are still holding the cards close
to their chest.
Even today – two months before the scheduled date
for signing an agreement – the Iranians have hardly budged while the
Americans have reached the limit of concessions. Rouhani left the
following instruction to his negotiations team: Iran will not give up
any ability it has already acquired. It will not dismantle any
centrifuges.
So the Iranians are saying to the Americans: You have already
crossed the Rubicon, agreed to leave us most of the centrifuges, a
certain enrichment ability, and let us continue to engage in research
and development – in other words, to continue developing advanced
centrifuges. So take just one more tiny step towards us and let us
increase the number of advanced centrifuges over time.
And the Iranians have another condition: The moment the
agreement is signed, an immediate removal of all the sanctions and a
full return to the family of nations.
The Americans have agreed that Iran will continue to hold onto
the major part of the centrifuges, but are demanding that the West will
control the uranium enrichment products: The quantity, the enrichment
rate and the transfer of surpluses to Russia.
That's ridiculous. It means that the Obama administration has
basically agreed that Iran will become a nuclear threshold state, only
the supervision will be tighter in the first years. In other words, the
moment the Iranians decide to seize the opportunity, they will break
through with a bomb very quickly. Iran is retaining the option to
produce a nuclear weapon whenever it feels like it.
It's not
Netanyahu's outcry that is stopping Obama from taking the last step
towards the Iranians. England, Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states, and
especially France, are unhappy with the agreement that is taking shape.
As long as he fails to create a consensus with his partners, he cannot
present the agreement to the American people.
‘I will only take on targets that won’t kill me, but steer clear of those who just might?’
A great piece by Nick Cohen in the London Spectator.
As there is much, much more in this vein coming, I offer you 10 truths that ought to be self-evident.
A religion is not a race. Sometimes, not always, it is a system of
violent beliefs that claims the right to subjugate others – most notably
its ‘own’ coerced adherents.
Undoubtedly there are white racists and Hindu nationalists who treat
religion as a race and hate Muslims because they are Muslims. Their
existence ought to present no problem to principled people, who should
fight, criticise and satirise them with the same force and for the same
reasons they fight religious obscurantism.
Criticism of religion – including bawdy irreverent criticism— is a defence against oppressive power.
In our time, the most oppressive religious movements are variants on
radical Islam. That may change. You only have to look at Hindu
fundamentalism in India or anti-Muslim Buddhist fundamentalism in Burma
to see how. But for the present we must fight the enemies in front of
us. What other choice do we have?
It is not ‘Islamophobic’ to satirise radical Islamists and their
beliefs – the main targets of radical Islamists include other Muslims as
well as Christians, Jews, Yazidis and secularists.
Even if in your confused liberal mind you think that it is, no one
has the right to stop satire or criticism because they are offended.
No one has the right to kill those who offend them.
If they claim that right, they are the most deserving targets of satire and criticism imaginable.
And if you do not then satirise and criticise them because you are frightened of ending up like Charlie Hebdo’s
dead journalists, or of taking a whipping in a PC backlash, how can you
in conscience satirise left or right wing politicians you despise, or
the evangelical Christians, Jewish fundamentalists, Catholic
reactionaries, Russian orthodox Putinists you deplore?
Are you not saying, if only when you are by yourself and think no
one is listening: ‘I will only take on targets that won’t kill me, but
steer clear of those who just might?’
Bret Stephens and Ari Shavit debate the current situation in
Israel and the future of Zionism at Hadassah's 97th National Convention
in Las Vegas with Prof. Gil Troy as moderator. This one is a bit long.
Let's go to the videotape.
I'm still watching this one and may have more comments later, so be sure to check back later.
Deja vu all over again: Al-Qaeda targeting European railways
The image above is the aftermath of a terror attack on the train station in Bologna, Italy on August 2, 1980 by the Popular Front for the Liberation of 'Palestine.' I wrote about that attack at some length here.
Fast forward 33 years. Based on a call intercepted by the United States National Security Agency (yes, the same one for whom Edward Snowden used to work), the German newspaper Bild reported on Monday that al-Qaeda is targeting European railways.
According to Bild, the militant
group was possibly targeting trains and tunnels, with the intention to
sabotage railway tracks and the electric cabling.
The German newspaper cited the information as coming from a
conference call intercepted by the US National Security Agency (NSA),
involving high-ranking al-Qaida operatives.
As a result, authorities deployed undercover police officers at main stations and along major routes, Bild stated.
Hmmm. Maybe they're trying to convince Europe not to declare al-Qaeda a terror organization (just joking).
Asia to replace Europe as Israel's biggest trading partner?
In light of last month's publication of Europe's Nuremberg guidelines, which seek to force Israel to declare that Judea, Samaria, 'east' Jerusalem and the Golan Heights are not part of our country, there are increasing calls in Israel to turn away from Europe toward Asia as its main trading partner. Here's former Israeli ambassador to the United Nations Dore Gold.
[Former Middle East expert for the US Vice President's office David] Wurmser concludes that Israel
make Asia its preferred export destination and not Europe. This is a
decision Israel will have to make as it influences how it builds its
energy infrastructure. If Europe begins to present itself as an
unreliable trading partner, then there will be many more Israeli voices
who adopt the idea of making Asia into Israel's preferred market for its
gas exports.
Professor Yisrael Aumann, Nobel prize winner in Economics, reaches a similar conclusion in an interview with Yisrael HaYom.
Is there an alternative to the West?
"There's an economic awakening in Asia --
China, Korea, India, Singapore, Kazakhstan. That's something new. It
increases global competition, and competition is good for the economy. I
see it as a good thing, not just for Israel but for the whole world."
Do you see it as the rise of a new civilization in place of the one we've known so far?
"I don't want to be that kind of prophet. It's
obvious that the Far East is waking up, but it's still too early to
talk about the decline of the West. The Chinese asked me what I
suggested for them. I said: 'Learn English now so that in another 50
years, the whole world will learn Chinese.' They're not interested in us
for nothing. Despite the political difficulties, there are games that
we, as a nation, are winning. Israeli scientific research is such a
victory. So are Israeli technology and the start-ups -- what the world
calls 'the start-up nation.'"
Gold believes that Europe needs Israel economically more than Israel needs Europe.
A
German adviser to Chancellor Angela Merkel told The Jerusalem Post last
month that European cooperation with Israel in research and development
in the EU's Horizon 2020 program is a European interest and not just an
Israeli interest.
The background to the
EU's program with Israel is the need for Europe to improve its global
competitiveness and increase jobs and economic growth on the continent
after years of sluggish growth. The Horizon 2020 program is not a
European handout to Israel, but a joint initiative by which Israel puts
up funds by itself and receives 1.6 euros for joint research and
development for every euro it puts in.
Because of its
scientific prowess, Israel is the only non-European country to have been
invited to take part in this program. The Europeans knew what they were
doing by inviting Israel, which is no longer viewed as a country known
only for its Jaffa oranges, as it was in the 1950s. Clearly, both sides
benefit from this cooperation and both have much to lose by its
politicization by EU bureaucrats in Brussels.
So what were the
Europeans thinking when they got Israel involved in the first place?
Economists have long recognized that knowledge-based industries are the
fastest-growing portion of the global economy, and serve as engines for
economic growth. These are precisely the technological fields in which
Israel leads and which Europe needs.
In their book "Start-Up
Nation," Dan Senor and Saul Singer quote an American high-tech
executive who admits that for companies like Google, Microsoft, and
Intel, "the best-kept secret is that we all live and die by the work of
our Israeli teams."
Why should Europe
jeopardize its cooperation with Israel, which has served as such an
important partner for the U.S. companies? To go down the path of
limiting its scientific cooperation with Israel seems to be, ultimately,
a self-defeating policy for Europe itself.
Then there is the issue
of Israel's offshore gas fields. Europe presently imports most of its
gas from Russia and from North Africa. David Wurmser used to serve as a
Middle East expert for the U.S. vice president's office and later
advised Noble Energy, which is involved in Israeli gas exploration. He
points out in a paper for the Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs that
there are today five existing or planned pipelines connecting Europe
with the gas of North Africa. Four of the pipelines come through
Algeria, which is facing growing threats from al-Qaida affiliates.
Elsewhere in the Middle East, as in Sinai, they have shown their
readiness to sabotage such pipelines. Having another source of gas from
Israel could be critical for Europe if some of its current energy
sources do not come available.
Aumann, whose specialty is game theory, believes that Israel doesn't need European money for scientific cooperation.
"The scientific cooperation
doesn't depend on money. It doesn't depend on grants. On the contrary.
The grants depend on the scientific cooperation. Here at the Center for
the Study of Rationality, we had long-term cooperation without European
money. The money doesn't create cooperation, so it doesn't look like it
will be affected."
Aumann's manner is calm even when I mention
things that should be upsetting -- not just to him, of course, but also
to the entire institution of higher education. This is how he responds
to Hebrew University Professor Shai Arkin's statement that severing
research relationships would damage the universality of Israeli research
and make it provincial:
"I don't share those concerns. It seems to me
that there was good cooperation with the Europeans and the Americans
before, and it will go on afterward, too. The Europeans aren't
threatening to sever scientific connections. Scientific connections
aren't money. I had a case where I had a close scientific connection
with one of the European researchers. He visited us in Israel often. One
day, he joined the boycott of Israel. We were shocked and acted in a
way that resulted in him losing more than we did. We continued to
thrive. Now it's different. I'm afraid of what could happen if we give
in."
What do you mean?
"We're opening a door here for worse things to
happen -- for there to be no scientific cooperation at all. The next
stage could be a threat that if we don't leave Judea, Samaria and
Jerusalem now, a scientific boycott will be declared against all of
Israel, not only on the institutions in Judea and Samaria. The thought
that concessions bring calm is inaccurate. If we agree to a boycott of
Judea and Samaria and don't resist it, thinking that we'll be left alone
if we consent, we'll get the opposite result.
"The thing is that the people who are shouting
that it's bad for Israel's scientific community are the same ones who
have it in for Judea and Samaria anyway. So they're not exactly acting
out of pure intentions toward Israeli scientific research. I admit that
this applies in the reverse situation, too -- as far as people who
support living in Judea and Samaria, as I do. The question is not
entirely political, but politics are involved, at least partially. Most
of the people who are terribly worried about the future of Israel's
scientific research are on the left side of the barricades anyway, and
those who aren't so concerned hold different political opinions."
Is Israel's scientific research dependent on Europe?
"Israeli scientific research isn't dependent
on Europe. Still, scientific cooperation with Europe, and mainly with
the United States, is an important factor. But that's scientific
cooperation; we're not getting any money from the Europeans.
Incidentally, cooperation isn't important just to us, but to them too."
What's unmentioned in either article is the increasing Islamization in Europe, which is likely to assure (as if Europe's anti-Semites needed the push) that these sorts of initiatives from Europe will continue. In 50 years, Europe may well be a backwater to western civilization, but a center of Islam. Israel should start pushing for Asian markets now to get in on the ground floor. Perhaps the next President of the United States will similarly stop that country's euro-centrism.
Why do so many in Europe feel so much hostility to the most open and
liberal democracy in the Middle East? Daniel Gordis, President of the
Shalem Center, zeroes in on the source of the problem in this
fascinating look at the complex relationship between Europe, Israel and
the Arab World.
Geert Wilders on Europe: Israel is the litmus proof
Dutch politician Geert Wilders spoke in Los Angeles on Sunday and gave a brilliant speech about the future of Europe. You can find the full speech here. I'd like to share one part of it with you (Hat Tip: Herb G).
In the coming weeks and months, I will try to see as many patriot
leaders in Europe as possible. And I always ask them for their views on
Israel. Because Israel is the litmus proof.
The Jewish people did exactly the opposite of what the Europeans did
after the Second World War. They drew the right conclusion. They
realized that without a nation-state of their own there could be no
safety for their people.
Without a nation-state, without self-governance, without
self-determination there can be no security for a people nor
preservation of its identity. This was the insight that led the Zionists
to strive for the re-establishment of the state of Israel. Theodore
Herzl said that there had to be a Jewish state in order to ensure – I
quote – "a new blossoming of the Jewish spirit." – end of quote.
Indeed, a soul needs a body. The spirit of a people cannot flourish
outside the body of the nation-state. The nation-state is the political
body in which we live. We must preserve and cherish it. So that we can
pass on to our children our national identity, our democracy, our
liberty.
My friends, what we need today is Zionism for the nations of Europe.
The Europeans need to follow the example of the Jewish people and
re-establish their nation-state.
And that, my dear friends, is why every patriot, apart from being a
democrat, by definition also has to be a true friend of Israel. A
patriot cannot be anti-Semitic.
My friends, the great Zionist leader Ze'ev Jabotinsky said about the
Jewish people: "We do not have to apologize for anything. We are a
people as all other peoples; we do not have any intentions to be better
than the rest. We do not have to account to anybody. We are what we are,
we are good for ourselves, we will not change, nor do we want to." –
end of quote.
...
Let us emphasize this commitment to the resurgence of our national
pride with a symbolic gesture. Let us do so by endorsing the Jewish
nation-state and move the embassies of our countries from Tel Aviv to
Jerusalem. Let us fly the flags of all the free and proud nations of the
world over embassies in Jerusalem, the only true capital of Israel and
the cradle of our Judeo-Christian civilization.
Israel deserves our support. Not only because it is the frontline
against the totalitarian threat of Islam, but also because it shows how
important it is for a people to have its own homeland.
Surprise: Europe says they won't boycott a 'Palestinian government' that includes Hamas
I suppose this should come as no surprise to anyone. A senior European diplomat told the Arab newspaper al-Hayat on Tuesday that Europe will not boycott a 'Palestinian' government that includes Hamas.
However, the European diplomat said that any kind of proposal
necessitates that Palestinians unify their ranks, adding: “there won`t
be a peace proposal to one part of the Palestinians without the other”.
He emphasized “the world is moving and Palestinians should form one
government in the West Bank and the Gaza strip to be their reference in
the next stage”.
Just this week Hamas Prime Minister Haniyeh announced that the forming of a Palestinian unity government is dependant on non recognition of Israel.
According to Al Hayat the EU is also looking forward to play a
political role in case the US role fails. Europe`s role will not be
limited “only to financing and praying”, the diplomat said.
...
The official also said the EU is moving towards boycotting West Bank settlement products due to the fatal damage they inflict on the peace process.
It is hard to understand how products manufactured in settlements inflict fatal damage on a peace process that has been moribund since 2009, due to the Palestinian refusal to return to negotiations.
...
Over forty thousand Palestinians (15 % of the work force) work in the Israeli settlements. They are making almost double the wage of their peers in the Palestinian Authority.
Bulgaria concludes Hezbullah behind July terror attack: Will the EU care?
As expected, Bulgaria announced on Tuesday that it has concluded that Hezbullah was behind the terror attack against a tourist bus at the Burgas Airport in July. Five Israelis and the Bulgarian bus driver were killed in the attack. There have been indications over the last few months that in the event that it was determined that Hezbullah was behind the attack on Bulgaria, an EU-member state, that the European Union would at long last ban Hezbullah and its fundraisers. But, as I noted in an earlier post, France, Germany and Britain are all fearful of naming Hezbullah as a terrorist organization.
This is from the first link.
Three people were involved in the attack, two of whom had genuine
passports from Australia and Canada, Tsvetan Tsvetanov told reporters
after Bulgaria's national security council discussed the investigation.
"We
have established that the two were members of the militant wing of
Hezbollah," Tsvetanov said. "There is data showing the financing and
connection between Hezbollah and the two suspects."
...
Tehran has denied responsibility and accused Israel of plotting and
carrying out the blast. Hezbollah has not publicly responded to charges
by Israel and US agencies that it played a role.
The Netherlands
said in August that the EU should follow the lead of the United States,
which designated Hezbollah as a terrorist organization in the 1990s, a
move that would enable the EU to freeze Hezbollah's assets in Europe.
It's important to note that of all the 'soft targets' Hezbullah could have chosen in Europe, there was a reason for choosing Bulgaria: It was a way of attacking the United States by attacking a country that provided troops for the operations in both Iraq and Afghanistan.
Wednesday’s bombing is the first terrorist attack in Bulgaria since
the Communist era. Unlike the U.K. or Spain, Bulgaria isn’t considered a
key European target for international terrorists. Corruption and
transnational crime represent much greater threats to Bulgarian security
than terrorism. However, after the events of September 11, 2001,
Bulgaria identified itself as a close ally of the United States and has
maintained close diplomatic relations with Israel.
Since Bulgaria sent a contingent of troops to both Iraq and
Afghanistan to demonstrate solidarity with the United States’ war on
terror, Bulgarian security authorities have recognized that the country
could become a target for terrorism. Clearly, the Burgas bombing caught
the Bulgarian security forces by surprise, perhaps not least because
Bulgaria itself wasn’t the terrorists’ target.
But Bulgaria did more than provide troops. It has actually become a close ally of the United States. The following comes from a mailing I received from the Israel Project.
Wikileaks cables from 2007 indicate
that the U.S.’s “primary goal [was to] increase Bulgaria’s
capacity to deploy and fight interoperably with U.S. and NATO
forces overseas” (http://is.gd/NFq8gW). Progress
toward that goal, coupled with Bulgaria’s status as a close U.S.
ally, contributed greatly to close bilateral ties.
U.S.-Bulgarian
interoperability: Since 2007, there have been three
joint training exercises between the U.S. 31st Fighter Wing
out of Aviano AB and Bulgarian pilots. The most recent,
Thracian Star 2012, involved more than 500 U.S. airmen
flying 556 sorties over 16 flying days (http://is.gd/cxSWGo &
http://is.gd/xl2q7T).
NATO-Bulgarian
interoperability: Bulgaria completed a major NATO
interoperability program in 2011, laying the groundwork for
future joint operations (http://is.gd/KemcX8). The
country currently participates in a half-dozen of NATO’s
Smart Defense projects and will open a NATO Crisis
Management Center in Sofia in the coming months (http://is.gd/3kSxDH &
http://is.gd/fBn66b).
The center will focus on drafting strategy and training
specialists.
Military basing: A
December 2005 U.S.-Bulgarian Defense Cooperation Agreement
gives the United States military access to and shared use of
several Bulgarian military facilities (http://is.gd/uhSeDU).
Last year Sofia expressed its desire to host more U.S. bases
(http://is.gd/iFsd1z).
Bulgaria’s willingness to host American military assets has
become particularly critical as some NATO allies have sought
to place conditions on U.S. basing: Bulgaria offered, for
instance, to host NATO missile defense assets at a time when
their placement in Turkey was uncertain (http://is.gd/ngQXM7).
Economic relations: A
Financial Times evaluation of Bulgaria at the end
of 2012 affirmed statements by Bulgarian officials to the
effect that economically the country is “an absolute island
of stability” (http://is.gd/XpTH8Y). Last
week, Bulgarian economic officials outlined an expected
“wave” of U.S. investors (http://is.gd/B2VOeN)
seeking to establish footholds in the country before an
expected Chinese investment boom gains traction (http://is.gd/FXg1ii).
The U.S. State Department describes the investment climate
as “generally positive” and notes that the “top foreign
investor in Bulgaria is a U.S. company” (http://is.gd/uhSeDU).
Ambassador Ries recently echoed those points (http://is.gd/jIdUWo).
As you can see, Bulgaria is in fact a close American ally. And at the outset of this investigation it seemed clear that if Hezbullah was behind the terror attack, the European Union would declare them a designated terror organization. So what happened? As I noted in that earlier post, France fears for its UNIFIL troops and Germany fears the estimated 900 Hezbullah agents who live in Germany.
It is a “very bad thing that Hezbollah can
operate in Europe regarding fund-raising and logistics,” US Ambassador Daniel
Benjamin, a former coordinator for counterterrorism at the State Department in
the first Obama administration, said. Hezbollah’s legal status in the EU
“undermines security goals,” he said.
“If you want to put a dent in
Hezbollah activities, it would be a positive thing” to outlaw the Lebanese
group, and an EU terror “designation would be a blow to Hezbollah’s legitimacy,”
Benjamin said.
The London-based Henry Jackson Society and the Washington-
based Foundation for Defense of Democracies think tanks hosted a series of panel
discussions with a who’s who of global experts on Iranian sanctions, human
rights in the Islamic Republic, and the use of military force to stop Iran’s
illicit nuclear program.
So who is better able to pressure the Europeans? The United States, which may rant and rave but has made itself powerless over the last four years? Or Hezbullah, which can threaten European lives and freedom?
This doesn't look good. While I hope and pray that Europe will do the right thing and ban Hezbullah, I'm not betting on it.
The Commentator has exclusively learned that today, the Bulgarian
government will implicate, though likely not name the terrorist group
Hezbollah in its report on the 2012 bus bombing that has been the
subject of much speculation over the past six months.
The Commentator has learned that both the German and French governments
have both piled pressure on the Bulgarians to "use nuanced language" in
the report, for fear that Bulgaria may be the focus of future attacks
if Hezbollah is openly named.
The Bulgarian government, it has been stated by leading sources, has
been informed through ‘back channels’ that there will be serious
repercussions from Hezbollah if it is to publically and overtly name the
group. This information comes despite strong pressure from the US
government to make clear that the bombing was indeed the work of the
Lebanese terrorist outfit.
To date, Hezbollah in its entirety is not proscribed by the United
Kingdom, nor by the European Union, a move that it still not thought to
be forthcoming despite the latest revelations.
You might recall that the US government has been putting a lot of pressure on the Europeans to declare Hezbullah, which both operates and raises funds in Europe, a designated terror organization, and that the Europeans had agreed to do so if the results of the Burgas investigation showed that Hezbullah was behind the attack. So why aren't the Europeans willing to accept the results?
France has troops with UNIFIL in Lebanon and fears that they will suffer reprisal attacks if they agree to ban Hezbullah in Europe.
Germany is said to have more than 900 Hezbullah operatives in its midst, including 'students' in its universities and drug dealers. Germany has been talking about banning Hezbullah for years, but is afraid to pull the trigger. They also have troops in UNIFIL.
And Britain has made the farcical distinction between Hezbullah's 'political' and 'military' wings and bans the 'military' wing while talking to the 'political' wing.
The Europeans are
undermining American, Israeli, and European security by refusing to
recognize that Hezbullah is a terrorist organization. But, incredibly, the Wall Street Journal implies that it's only Israel that wants Hezbullah banned.
But the report by Bulgaria's government, which is seen as an independent actor on Mideast affairs, could lend weight to an Israeli push to get the European Union to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization, said European officials.
As noted, the report will not specifically name Hezbullah, which will give the Europeans cover to do nothing if they chose to do so. Nevertheless, the Europeans will be under pressure to react once the report is released.
A U.S. official said the White House will issue a statement following Bulgaria's release of the report.
The U.S. and Israel have accused Iran's elite military unit, the Islamic
Revolutionary Guard Corps, of ordering a string of overseas terrorist
attacks aimed at American and Israeli targets over the past two years,
including in India, Thailand and Georgia.
Iran and Hezbollah have denied involvement in any of the international
attacks. Tehran also has accused Israel of assassinating leading Iranian
nuclear scientists, something the Jewish state has never confirmed nor
denied.
Evidence of a Hezbollah-directed strike on EU territory could shift the
perception of the Lebanese-Shiite group in Europe, which has resisted
following Washington's decision to label it a terrorist organization.
If the Bulgarian report reaches a clear conclusion, a senior European
diplomat said on Monday, "We will have to look very seriously at the
options we have."
I find it amazing how little the Europeans have learned over the last 35 years. They continue to believe that Arab-Islamic terrorism won't strike them if only they don't cower to it.
UPDATE 10:28 AM
Dr. Rusty hits the nail on the head (Hat Tip: Shy Guy).
Isn't the clear implication here that terrorism does work? That at least some countries in Europe can be scared into policy decisions favored by the terrorists for fear of violence.
I think it does.
Of course, there is another explanation here. Namely, that France and Germany don't consider blowing up a bus full of Jews as "terrorism".
US intelligence: Syria could activate chem weapons in less than two hours
Getting to this point was brilliant, just brilliant. The New York Times is reporting that in late November and early December, Syria mixed chemical weapons, which it still retains. The US was informed about this by - who else - Israeli intelligence, and a combination of the US, Russia, the Arab countries and the EU got Assad to back off. But Assad retains the weapons. The German intelligence agency believes they're deliverable in 4-6 hours, but US intelligence takes that time down to less than two hours.
So now, the same group is debating whether to destroy the Syrian air force, thereby taking away Assad's ability to deliver the weapons. The result might be that the war in Syria ends, the weapons fall into the hands of the Islamic 'rebels' from which they are either fired into Israel, or shipped to Hezbullah to lob them over their border into Israel. Brilliant. Just brilliant (Hat Tip: Memeorandum).
But the scare a month ago has renewed debate about whether the West
should help the Syrian opposition destroy Mr. Assad’s air force, which
he would need to deliver those 500-pound bombs.
The chemical munitions are still in storage areas that are near or on
Syrian air bases, ready for deployment on short notice, officials said.
The Obama administration and other governments have said little in
public about the chemical weapons movements, in part because of concern
about compromising sources of intelligence about the activities of Mr.
Assad’s forces. This account is based on interviews with more than half a
dozen military, intelligence and diplomatic officials, all of whom
spoke on the condition of anonymity because of the intelligence matters
involved.
The head of Germany’s foreign intelligence service, the BND, warned in a
confidential assessment last month that the weapons could now be
deployed four to six hours after orders were issued, and that Mr. Assad
had a special adviser at his side who oversaw control of the weapons,
the German newsmagazine Der Spiegel
reported. Some American and other allied officials, however, said in
interviews that the sarin-laden bombs could be loaded on planes and
airborne in less than two hours.
“Let’s just say right now, it would be a relatively easy thing to load
this quickly onto aircraft,” said one Western diplomat.
How the United States and Israel, along with Arab states, would respond
remains a mystery. American and allied officials have talked vaguely of
having developed “contingency plans” in case they decided to intervene
in an effort to neutralize the chemical weapons, a task that the
Pentagon estimates would require upward of 75,000 troops. But there have
been no evident signs of preparations for any such effort.
The United States military has quietly sent a task force of more than
150 planners and other specialists to Jordan to help the armed forces
there, among other things, prepare for the possibility that Syria will
lose control of its chemical weapons.
Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu,
was reported to have traveled to Jordan in recent weeks, and the
Israeli news media have said the topic of discussion was how to deal
with Syrian weapons if it appeared that they could be transferred to
Lebanon, where Hezbollah could lob them over the border to Israel. But
the plans, to the extent they exist, remain secret.
Remember the bad old days when that cowboy George W. Bush would have taken action without 'consulting' with the Russians, Europeans and Arab countries until we got to the point where there was real danger to us? Aren't you glad that now we have Obama who leads from behind? What could go wrong?
In a resolution sponsored by Senator Joe Lieberman (I-Ct), the US Senate last week urged Europe to take action to sanction Hezbullah. It's important that Europe ban Hezbullah, because much of Hezbullah's fundraising is done in Europe. And it's not just an Israeli issue. Hezbullah affects the United States, Syria and many other countries.
But the Europeans don't get it. In the post linked above, I reported that Europe was going to make a decision on Hezbullah based upon whether Hezbullah was implicated in the Bulgarian Airport terror attack. In that post, I argued that was the wrong standard of measure.
At the top of that post, there is a picture of the Bologna, Italy train station from August 1980. The station had been attacked by the PLO, with whom the Italians thought they had a deal not to carry out terror attacks. Despite that fact, and despite the fact that Hezbullah attacked French troops in Beirut in 1983, Europe still thinks it can make deals with terror organizations so long as the terror organizations don't attack in Europe's backyard. And the Europeans aren't able to empathize with others who are being victimized by the same terror organizations.
Europe's inability to empathize is nothing new. This is from Benny Weinthal.
Josh Block, a former Clinton administration official and CEO of The
Israel Project, a US pro-Israel organization based in Washington, told the Post
“Iran’s terrorist army Hezbollah has killed more Americans than any terrorist
group except al-Qaida, and according to intelligence officials, in the past year
has been more active in plotting and conducting terrorist attacks outside of the
Middle East than in the last 20 years, including in Europe, Azerbaijan, Cyprus,
Thailand, and North America.
“When the White House counterterrorism chief
says that the EU’s ‘failure to designate Hezbollah as a terrorist organization
makes it more difficult to defend our countries and protect our citizens,’ one
wonders if the European Union understands or cares,” he said.
“The EU’s
failure to define the global terrorist organization for what it is calls into
question the EU’s commitment to fighting terrorism and supporting peace in the
Middle East, their interest in the welfare of innocent Syrian victims of
Hezbollah, Iran and [Bashar] Assad’s sadistic partnership, and general ability
of the EU to function in a serious manner.”
It's not that they don't understand. They don't care because they're not capable of empathy - of feeling another person's pain. It's a problem the Europeans have had for a long time.
A few recent news stories out of Europe confirm that concerns about the continent’s skyrocketing Muslim populations are, in fact, anything but alarmist. On August 8, for example, Britain’s Daily Telegraph actuallypermitted into its pages an article reporting that “Britain and the rest of the European Union are ignoring a demographic time bomb: a recent rush into the EU by migrants, including millions of Muslims, will change the continent beyond recognition over the next two decades, and almost no policy-makers are talking about it.” According to the Telegraph, Spain’s foreign-born population rose from 3.2% in 1998 to 13.4% in 2007, and in Brussels, “the top seven baby boys’ names recently were Mohamed, Adam, Rayan, Ayoub, Mehdi, Amine and Hamza.” The Telegraph cited the highly euphemistic conclusion of a recent report by the Pew Forum on Religion & Public Life that the rapid introduction of large numbers of Muslims into Europe results in “a difficult social fit.”
Similarly, an August 26 article in Denmark’s Dispatch International revealed that the number of Muslims in Denmark and Sweden, which had previously been uncertain (with estimates ranging widely), could now be stated with an unprecedented degree of precision, based on a meticulous study of the records of given names in the two countries. Within ten or twenty thousand, the real number of Muslims (not including unregistered illegal aliens) was about “574,000…in Sweden and 256,000 in Denmark,” meaning “that Muslims make up 6.05% of Sweden’s population and 4.59% of Denmark’s.” The Swedish figure was up from around 3.21% in 1998: “In other words, the number of Muslims has roughly doubled over the period 1998-2011.” As for Denmark, although the climb was less precipitous, that country’s center-right governments between 2001 and 2011, while often criticized as Islamophobic, turned out to have “hardly made a dent in the Muslim growth rate.” As for Norway, the Norwegian website document.noreported on September 5 that just over 38% of all newborn babies in Oslo now have “mothers with foreign national backgrounds.”
Europe is on a journey, and the destination is clear. Just a few days ago it was reported that Kiwi, one of Norway’s largest grocery-store chains, has introduced a version of its employee uniform that comes equipped with a hijab. This summer in Marseilles, a city that some observers have long pointed to as cheering evidence that Islamic integration in Europe can work, a woman wearing a niqab, or full-face veil, in public – which, of course, violates French law – was confronted by a cop, who was, in turn, according to the Washington Post, confronted by a “youth” who informed him that the police “had no business patrolling the neighborhood and accosting its predominantly Muslim residents.” Next thing you know, this tête-à-tête-à-tête erupted into a full-scale riot, requiring “carloads of police reinforcements,” in which no fewer than three gendermes sustained injuries. The only surprises in the whole story are (a) that a French cop was actually on patrol in a “predominantly Muslim” neighborhood to begin with and (b) that he dared to confront a woman in niqab. This time, thankfully, the cops managed to get things under control: but how long will it be before the numbers have tilted to a point where control is impossible?
September 5 was Flag Day in Denmark. Outside Christianborg Place in Copenhagen, a formal ceremony was held paying tribute to members of the Danish military, living and dead; meanwhile, across the canal, a sizable mob of Muslims gathered, holding up signs reading “To hell with Danish soldiers” and “Islam will dominate the whole world” and howling out “Allah akbar” and various anti-Danish, anti-Christian, and anti-Western slogans in an effort to disrupt the commemoration. In an impromptu response, hundreds of the Danish soldiers in attendance formed a “human shield” along the canal and drowned out the Muslims with shouts and applause. “The soldiers’ exemplary behavior and good humor turned the episode into an inspiration,” wrote one commentator. But what happens when the howling Muslims outnumber the soldiers?
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
