Representatives of Jewish, Christian, Muslim and other religious groups gathered together recently at FBI headquarters in Washington, D.C., for a discussion on security issues facing faith communities.

The timing couldn’t be more apt, as one FBI source noted that this is the most “complex and dynamic threat environment we have ever been in.”

Every day, said the source, foreign governments are researching and identifying ways that they can “exploit” and “sow discord,” and turn people against their own communities. He added that faith communities need to think about the consequences of what happens if the United States and Iran have a deeper conflict, and Hezbollah responds by attacking local communities.

“You need to be thinking about that now,” stressed the source.

The FBI’s advice in a shooter situation? Run, hide, fight.

During the June 18 program, faith leaders heard from officials from the Department of Justice, Department of Homeland Security and others, including assistant director of the FBI’s Office of Partner Engagement Kerry Sleeper. Speakers highlighted the changing and growing threats facing faith communities, and listened as the community leaders discussed concerns of their members, as well as how to move forward and ensure that everyone—federal officials, local law enforcement and faith members—has the tools necessary to prevent future attack.

One discussion led by a specialist in the FBI focused on the preattack behaviors of active shooters. Noting that the agency had studied 63 active shooters, the agent sought to debunk some myths and highlight common threads among attackers.

For instance, the FBI agent said, while many say that these people are loners, in fact, all either lived with someone or had “significant” in person or online interactions. The attackers had, on average, 3.6 separate stressors in the year prior to the attack, and 73 percent had a known connection with their attack site. Where attackers had no connection, they often did surveillance prior to attacking.

Discussions were also held around concrete steps that faith leaders can take to prepare congregants if an attacker strike their house of worship. Noting that it can take several minutes for law enforcement to arrive during an active shooter situation, one official suggested that congregants be taught the importance of the FBI’s advice: run, hide, fight.

“It’s human nature to freeze if you don’t have a plan in place,” he said, adding that people should know where all the exits are and how they would escape. The advice to hide “really means to disappear”—not be hidden halfway or in view of the attacker. The other option is to fight.

“How will you defend yourself? You don’t need weapons; you don’t need jiu-jitsu,” but people do need a plan, the official advised, adding that “there are ways to prepare people mentally, without scaring them.”

‘We are all feeling vulnerable’

Eric Fusfield, deputy director of the International Center for Human Rights and Public Policy at B’nai B’rith International, appreciated the details and analysis, as well as the chance to hear from leaders in other faith communities.

“Our ability to build coalitions is always our greatest strength, and it’s always important that communities that face similar and overlapping threats to come together and identify ways to respond,” he continued. “We need the help and support of our neighbors, and they need ours, so it’s only natural we come together in times like this when we are all feeling vulnerable and want to secure our communities.”

Other sessions included an address by Elizabeth Neumann, assistant secretary for threat prevention and policy at the Department of Homeland Security, who said that the last few years have seen a rise in domestic terrorism from those who are “borrowing” from the ISIS handbook in planning and implementing attacks; and a talk by an FBI agent who recounted his experiences during a shooting in 2012 at a Sikh temple in Oak Creek, Wisc.

The daylong program was spearheaded by the Secure Communities Network, the Christian Emergency Network and Muslim Public Affairs Committee.
​
It is believed to be the first gathering of its kind hosted by the FBI and with such a “broad and diverse group” of participants, according to Michael Masters, national director and CEO of the Secure Community Network, which was founded in 2004 auspices of the Jewish Federations of North America and the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations.

 Talmud-Gelehrte sind zwar notorisch streitfreudig, wenn es um die Auslegung religiöser Schriften geht, aber vielleicht auch deshalb in tagespolitischen Fragen eher zurückhaltend. Deshalb war es eine Sensation, als 45 Talmud-Gelehrte einen offenen Brief unterschrieben, in dem sie eine „wachsende Zensur und die Einschränkung der Redefreiheit“ in Deutschland
beklagten.

Anlass war der Rücktritt eines der Ihren – des deutschen Talmud-Gelehrten Peter Schäfer – als Direktor des Jüdischen Museums Berlin (JMB). Einer der Urheber des Briefs, Ishay Rosen Zvi von der Universität Tel Aviv, nannte es „empörend“, dass Schäfer Antisemitismus vorgeworfen worden sei.

„Blood libel“ gegen Schäfer?

Zwar hat wohl niemand diesen Vorwurf erhoben, doch Zvi ging weiter und sprach von einer „blood libel“ gegen Schäfer. Unter „blood libel“ versteht man die Lüge, die Juden würden das Blut geschächteter christlicher Kinder benutzen, um ihre Pessach-Matzen zu backen. Eine Verleumdung, die im Mittelalter immer wieder zu mörderischen Pogromen führte. Die Gleichsetzung der vor allem von jüdischen Organisationen wie dem Zentralrat oder B’nai B’rith erhobenen Kritik an Schäfer mit dem Judenhass christlicher Fanatiker ist so absurd, dass man an Zvis akademischer Qualifikation noch mehr zweifeln muss als an seiner politischen Urteilskraft. Aber sie ist kennzeichnend für die Bitterkeit, die – so scheint es zumindest –
Schäfer selbst in die Auseinandersetzung um seinen Rücktritt getragen hat. In einer von über 370 Wissenschaftlern aus aller Welt unterzeichneten Erklärung wird nämlich von einer „erzwungenen Demission“ des Direktors gesprochen. Wenn Schäfer zum Rücktritt gezwungen wurde, dann hätte das nur Monika Grütters tun können. Als Staatsministerin für Kultur und Medien führt sie den Vorsitz im Stiftungsrat, der das Museum kontrollieren soll. Sollte Grütters dem Direktor den Rücktritt nahegelegt haben, dann kann nur Schäfer das wissen und weitergetragen haben.

Die 370 Gelehrten reden auch von „Lügen“ und „falschen Anschuldigungen“ gegen Schäfer. Die gleiche Formulierung findet sich im Brief des Vorsitzenden des Vereins der Freunde des Museums, Walter Kuna an alle Vereinsmitglieder. Das ist eine Praxis des Generalverdachts gegen Kritiker, die so empörend ist, wie es die – unbelegte – erzwungene Demission des Direktors wäre.

Nur eine Person wurde gefeuert

Tatsächlich ist nur eine Person am JMB gefeuert worden, und zwar Pressesprecherin Katharina Schmidt-Narischkin. Jahrelang hat sie loyal ihren Chef abgeschirmt und verteidigt. Kein Akademiker hat gegen diesen Willkürakt protestiert, der für den im JMB herrschende autoritären Stil typisch ist, dem sich viele Mitarbeiter – allen voran Programmdirektorin
Léontine Meijer-van Mensch – durch Weggang entzogen haben. Als Ergebnis bleibt die Dauerausstellung geschlossen, das geplante Kindermuseum unfertig, die Akademie des Museums ohne Führung.

Und wenn es um falsche Anschuldigungen geht, so muss vor allem die Unterstellung genannt werden, Benjamin Netanjahu habe bei Angela Merkel interveniert, was letztlich zu Schäfers „erzwungener Demission“ geführt habe. Eine Falschmeldung, die eine Zeitung von der anderen abschreibt, ohne die Quelle zu prüfen: Ein Artikel in der israelischen „Haaretz“, die ihrerseits einen Artikel der Berliner „taz“ überinterpretierte und mit einer irreführenden Überschrift versah.

Tatsächlich fand im Rahmen der deutsch-israelischen Regierungskonsultationen Ende 2018 ein Austausch von „Non-Papers“ statt. Das ist ein üblicher Vorgang, bei dem eine Seite die andere ausdrücklich unterhalb der Ebene offizieller Noten oder diplomatischer Demarchen auf bestimmte Sorgen aufmerksam macht – etwa auf die Geschichtsdarstellung in Schulbüchern oder die Unterbesetzung einer Konsulatsabteilung. In einem dieser Non-Papers, das ein Mitarbeiter des Auswärtigen Amts an die „taz“ durchstach, äußerte die israelische Seite ihr Befremden über die Jerusalem-Ausstellung des JMB, die nicht nur nach ihrer Meinung das jüdische Narrativ unzureichend berücksichtigte.

Staatsministerin Grütters hat sich dieser Kritik nicht angeschlossen. Sie hat die Ausstellung verteidigt und Schäfers Vertrag vier Monate nach der israelischen Intervention verlängert – was man als gezielte Brüskierung der Regierung Israels deuten könnte, aber kaum als Kotau vor Netanjahu. Bloße Fakten hindern aber keinen Netanjahu-Hasser daran, die Fake News zu
verbreiten, der jüdische Staat bestimme die Personalpolitik im deutschen Kulturbetrieb.  Weil sich der Zentralrat der Juden über einen Tweet des Museums empörte, in dem die Resolution des Bundestags zur antiisraelischen Boykottbewegung BDS kritisiert wird, beschimpfte Micha Brumlik den Zentralrat in der „taz“ als „Hofjuden“. Empörend ist dabei weniger, dass der emeritierte Professor der Erziehungswissenschaften den Zentralrat kritisiert, sondern dass er die Bundesrepublik mit einem feudalen Duodezfürstentum vergleicht.

„Blick nach vorn richten“

Inzwischen hat der Stiftungsrat getagt und Worte gewählt, die auch für auslegungsfreudige Talmud-Gelehrte eindeutig sind: Es sei „einmal mehr deutlich geworden, dass gerade auch Juden sich in der Arbeit des JMB wiedererkennen müssen und die nicht jüdische Welt mehr über das Judentum erfährt. Aus Fehlern der Vergangenheit haben Prof. Schäfer und das Museum ihre Konsequenzen gezogen. Jetzt heißt es, den Blick nach vorn zu richten.“

Die Grammatik ist schief, die Aussage klar: Viele Juden in Deutschland haben sich im JMB nicht wiedererkannt. Die nicht jüdische Welt hat zu wenig über das Judentum erfahren. Deshalb musste Schäfer gehen. Bis zur Benennung eines neuen Direktors oder einer neuen Direktorin im Frühjahr 2020 soll eine „Vertrauensperson“ den Stiftungsrat „in konzeptionellen Fragen beraten“. An dieser Personalie wird man erkennen können, ob das JMB tatsächlich den Blick nach vorne richtet und sich das „J“ im Namen wieder verdienen will.

Imagine, for a moment, that a 1,000-strong rally took place each year on city property in downtown Toronto.

Imagine that speakers at this rally described people of African descent as “inhuman,” praised the KKK and its leaders, alleged that Canada is “basically owned” by Africans, and called for Africans in formerly white-ruled South Africa to be “shot” if they insisted on remaining in their homeland.

Imagine that, in a show of force, participants in this rally marched up University Ave., disrupting traffic on one of the city’s busiest arteries.

The City of Toronto, you would understandably assume, would take every step possible to prevent this sort of hate rally from continuing.

In reality, a rally just like this – the Al Quds Day march – does take place each year in Toronto. The only difference is that, instead of targeting Africans, it targets Jews and Israelis.

The city’s failure to stop this outrage – and its instance on subsidizing this hate rally at taxpayers’ expense – is an unmitigated municipal embarrassment.

​The irony is that the politicians aren’t to blame for this one. Recently, after a year of dithering, city council finally endorsed proposals by Mayor John Tory and Councillor James Pasternak to impose financial penalties on organizers of hate activities on city property.

B’nai Brith Canada, as the grassroots voice of Canadian Jewry, followed up twice with city staff to reveal what the city is doing to implement council’s instructions in advance of the 2019 Al Quds Day rally June 1.

The answer: Apparently nothing.

Judging by the lack of substantive response from city staff, it appears that the Al Quds organizers won’t need to pay for occupying University Ave. without a permit. They won’t need to pay for using sound amplification equipment, again without a permit. They won’t need to pay for the dozens of police officers, at least, who will be required to secure the rally and prevent clashes with counter-protesters.

Instead, taxpayers – including Jewish and Israeli residents of Toronto – will be forced to pay for this outpouring of hate. Organizers of peaceful, lawful public events – such as Ribfest, the Walk with Israel, and the Roncesvalles Polish Festival – all pay their own fees. But hatemongers seemingly get a free pass from the city.

Many, if not most, Al Quds attendees aren’t even residents of Toronto. Last year, organizers hired eight buses to bring participants downtown, mostly coming from mosques in cities such as Brampton, Richmond Hill and Pickering. Only one Toronto pick-up location is listed.

In other words, extremists from across Southern Ontario will gather to spew hate in Toronto – and leave Torontonians footing the bill.

I call on the City of Toronto to put an end to this madness. I call on city staffers to simply do their jobs, and enforce the city’s Hate Activity Policy, which they have inexplicably failed to do for years.
​
At the end of the day, what I really call for is an end to the hypocrisy. We all know that if any other religious or national group were targeted in this way, the city would have taken decisive action long ago.

​Several prominent Jewish leaders on Monday denounced as “reprehensible” Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki’s reported comment last week that paying compensation for Jewish property stolen during the Holocaust would be a “posthumous victory” for Nazi leader Adolf Hitler.

“Poland was itself subjected to years of savage Nazi occupation, which makes its failure to appropriately confront the tragedy of millions of its Jewish citizens who were earmarked for annihilation by the Germans especially troubling,” World Jewish Congress (WJC) President Ronald S. Lauder stated. “Successive Polish governments have steadfastly refused to recognize the material losses of Polish Jewry and have essentially treated their homes and other property as the spoils of war — and individual Poles and Polish institutions have profiteered from these assets for more than seven decades.”

“This unwillingness to acknowledge that the victims of the Holocaust and their heirs are entitled to a modicum of material justice is unfortunate enough, but Prime Minister Morawiecki’s contention — assuming that it was uttered as reported — that providing restitution to Jews for their stolen property would be ‘Hitler’s posthumous victory’ is alarming in the extreme,” Lauder added. “I hope that Prime Minister Morawiecki was misquoted and can provide an explanation. Otherwise the sentiments underlying his words can only be characterized as reprehensible and must be thoroughly rejected.”

“As a longtime friend of Poland and the Polish people, I call upon Prime Minister Morawiecki to either deny or retract this deeply offensive and utterly incomprehensible statement,” Lauder concluded.

B’nai B’rith International President Charles O. Kaufman and CEO Daniel S. Mariaschin said, “B’nai B’rith is appalled at the absolutist stance of the Polish government that it will never provide any restoration or compensation to Jews whose property was stolen during the Holocaust.”

They continued:

“Polish Prime Minister Mateusz Morawiecki and his Law and Justice party have clung to the view that because Poland was also a victim of Nazi Germany it cannot be held responsible for crimes committed against Jews. They are therefore denying rightful and long-overdue compensation to Polish Jews whose property was stolen during World War II. However, some Poles did participate in crimes against Jews, before, during and after the war.”

“Poland’s post-war Communist regime nationalized much of the property stolen from Jews. Morawiecki says any restitution to Jews must be paid by Berlin. Last year in the shadow of a Polish law that would have criminalized talk of Poland’s complicity in the Holocaust, we noted that Poland must acknowledge a history of antisemitism that preceded the Holocaust and persists to this day.”

Earlier this month, hundreds of far-rightists marched in Warsaw to protest against a US law on the restitution of Jewish property seized during or after World War II, an issue increasingly featuring in campaigns for upcoming Polish elections.

Carrying placards with slogans including, “Poland has no obligations,” and, “Holocaust hyenas,” demonstrators marched from the prime minister’s office to the US embassy in central Warsaw.

Poland was home to one of the world’s biggest Jewish communities before it was almost entirely wiped out by Nazi German occupiers who set up death camps such as Auschwitz on Polish soil. Thousands of Jews were also killed by native Poles during the war.

Former owners and their descendants have been campaigning since the fall of communism in 1989 to be compensated for lost property, which was seized by Poland’s authoritarian rulers, but successive Polish administrations have lacked the money or determination to resolve the issue.
​
The nationalist Law and Justice (PiS) government — led by Morawiecki — has said that as a victim in World War II Poland should not be saddled with any financial obligations.