Houses of Worship Are Vulnerable

¶ … Houses of Worship Are Vulnerable

If one tries to view the world through the twisted perspective of a terrorist -- and while this is repugnant, it is also necessary if one wants to be able to defend against terrorist attacks -- one can see how a house of worship is a tempting target for an attack. There are pragmatic reasons why a church, a temple, a mosque, or a synagogue would be tempting as a target: During services there will be a collection in one place of the kind of people that the terrorist wants to attack. Like prey driven into a blind canyon, the participants in a religious service can be much more easily killed than if they were scattered around a city in the course of their daily lives.

There are also symbolic reasons for attacking a house of worship. Such places are supposed to be sanctuaries. Although the legal concept of sanctuary no longer obtains, most of us believe that houses of worship are places that a person should be able to go in safety to commune with his or her sense of the divine. To make people afraid to worship is to strike at what is among the most important aspects of their sense of self. Stepping between a person and God is a powerful act -- made even more so when the reason that a person is being targeted is his or her religion.

Because of this -- because of the potential for so much physical, psychological, emotional, and cultural harm when a house of worship is attacked -- it is imperative that police and other first-responders be especially attentive to the safety of such structures and the communities that they serve. One of the hallmarks of our democracy is that Americans be safe to worship in safety. While this can never be guaranteed absolutely, when congregations and police work together, however, it can come as close as possible to being assured.

This paper examines the ways in which one synagogue, Congregation Gesher Shalom Jewish Community Center of Fort Lee (New Jersey), can be made as safe as possible. The plan outlined here includes formal steps that can be made by police and city officials. But it also includes the cooperation of the congregation and the surrounding community. This latter is not meant to imply that citizens should be required to be the primary protectives of their own communities, and it is certainly not meant to encourage vigilantism. Rather, it is an acknowledgement that it is always better for communities when citizens and officials can work together.

Congregation Gesher Shalom Jewish Community Center is a typical synagogue in terms of its vulnerabilities. Synagogues must be open to their communities if they are to serve their primary purpose. This is especially true for this congregation since the site includes community facilities too. The synagogue leaders describe their place in the community in the following way:

From the outside, every synagogue is basically the same. Regardless of how modern or extensive the exterior, they are all merely mortar and brick. It is what is on the inside that actually makes for a "House of Worship." And though it is true that the synagogue is a place of prayer, where one comes to praise and honor God, many insist the key word in the designation "House of Worship" is the word house. It is our belief that the synagogue should house a place where children can learn and embrace Judaism. It should be home to senior citizens where they can find compassion and camaraderie. A place where families can rejoice in the treasures of Jewish life. A dwelling where the arts can flourish. A synagogue is not a place where material things abide, but where the heart lives and the soul triumphs. (http://www.geshershalom.org/about.html)

Risks to Synagogues

Synagogues are not the only American houses of worship that have historically come under attack. Perhaps the most infamous of all attacks on American houses of worship occurred against the 16th Street Baptist Church in Birmingham, Alabama, when in 1963 four children were killed in a bombing. Black churches have been attacked repeatedly over the last half-century as people sought to use violence to "keep blacks in their place" and out of simple hatred and racism. Synagogues too have often been the subjects of threats and violence, especially in the decade since 9/11 as Muslim terrorists have felt themselves invigorated as they see themselves part of a universal jihad.

New Jersey has both the second highest number of Jews (by percentage) and the second highest number of Muslims (by percentage) in the United States.

Although one would like to believe that it does not need to be said, it is still perhaps necessary to say that in looking at Muslim extremism against American Jews I am not in any way indicting all Muslims. Most members of any human group are basically good, wanting only to lead their own lives. Some of any group are heroes and compassionate beyond the ability of most of us to aim for, much less achieve. And some of any group are villains and vicious beyond the ability of us to understand. It is these last that attack houses of worship.

A case from last year in New York demonstrates the risks that synagogues in the Northeast face. It also showcases the ways in which threats to synagogues are often related to threats to other sites in a community.

Four New York residents have been arrested for an alleged plot to attack two synagogues in the Bronx and to shoot down planes at a military base in Newburgh, New York.... [They] were arrested on May 20, 2009 after planting what they believed to be bombs in cars outside of the Riverdale Temple and the nearby Riverdale Jewish Center. They also plotted to destroy military aircraft at the New York Air National Guard Base located at Stewart Airport in Newburgh, New York....

All four of the men, who were fueled by their hatred of America and the Jews, have been charged in an eight-count indictment for conspiring and attempting to use weapons of mass destruction within the United States, conspiracy to acquire and use anti-aircraft missiles, and conspiracy and attempt to kill U.S. officers and employees. "These were people who were eager to bring death to Jews," Assistant U.S. Attorney Eric Snyder said at a court hearing the day after the arrests. "These are extremely violent men." & #8230; Cromitie expressed his interest in doing "something to America" and said that if he were to die, he would go to "paradise" as a martyr. (Four Arrested in New York for Terrorist Plot against Synagogues)

This is an important reminder that in supplying security measures for synagogues other structures can be kept safe too because if attacks on synagogues are interrupted then attacks on other sites may also be forestalled. The reverse is also true as well: When planned attacks on other buildings are prevented, synagogues will often be kept safer too.

Of course, there are other threats to synagogues in Fort Lee as there are to synagogues across the nation. Among these are threats from far-right movies such as neo-Nazis. Neo-Nazis also attack members of other groups -- gays, blacks, immigrants from all over. This is a useful reminder that people who commit acts out of hate against one group are often involved in hate crimes against other vulnerable groups. Thus part of providing security to a synagogue requires city officials and first-responders -- as well as community activists -- to be aware of all hate groups in their community.

The following provides a snapshot of the ways in which neo-Nazis have acted in American communities:

American Skinheads have repeatedly acted out their racial warrior fantasies in acts of exceptional violence. In August 1990, in Houston, Texas, two-18-year-old Skinheads stomped a 15-year-old Vietnamese boy to death. One of the killers testified at his trial that the victim's last words were: "God forgive me for coming to this country. I'm so sorry." In a June 1991 drive-by shotgun slaying in Arlington, Texas, three-16-year-old members of the Confederate Hammerskins killed a black man while he sat on the back of a truck with two white friends.

Skinheads belonging to the Aryan National Front (ANF) were responsible for two separate killings of homeless black men in Birmingham, Alabama. One was beaten to death under a downtown viaduct before dawn on Christmas Eve 1991. He had been clubbed with a baseball bat and kicked repeatedly with heavy boots. ...

When they cannot find living human beings to assault - or when their courage cannot rise to that level - American Skins have attacked the graves of the departed. A Skinhead and two accomplices were charged with the April 21, 1993, desecration of a Jewish cemetery in Everett, Massachusetts. In addition to overturning 100 tombstones and spray-painting swastikas, the vandals scrawled a birthday salute to Adolf Hitler on a nearby wall....

Other Jewish institutions have also been attacked. On March 20, 1994, two Skinheads shot several rounds from a high-powered semi-automatic rifle into the stained glass windows of a Eugene, Oregon, synagogue. The shooters were sentenced to terms of 54 and 57 months imprisonment. (The Skinhead International: The United States)

At least in some ways keeping synagogues (and other institutions) safe from neo-Nazi attacks is easier than keeping them safe from Muslim terrorists. While nearly all Muslims are good people, neo-Nazis are, by definition bad people. They are easier to identify and keeping surveillance on them does not have the same civil rights problems that keeping track of those who affiliate with gangs or other violent groups.

Not all threats to synagogues are violent, of course. Synagogues, like other houses of worship -- and other buildings of course -- are subject to theft and other forms of non-violent "assault" like tagging. While these are serious, they are less so (obviously) than violent attacks and so should take lower priority. Moreover, in working to protect a synagogue against violent attacks one is also working to protect against lower-level attacks.

Working Hand in Hand

As noted above, the best way to ensure the security of any building is for its inhabitants or users to work closely together with first-responders. Those who use a building are aware of the routines of the place -- for example, when it will be empty. On the other hand, they may be relatively unaware of the ways in which they may be vulnerable to attack. Blending the knowledge of users of the rhythms of their building with the knowledge of security risks and security measures that first responders have is an excellent way to make a plan that will provide the greatest level of security possible.

Those who use a building, like a synagogue, that may be subject to attack, should be as aware of their surroundings as possible. The rabbis below may be taking things a little farther than most would in terms of trying to protect themselves, but the basic idea is a good one. So long as one stays away from vigilantism, it can be very empowering for people to work to provide security for themselves.

Fearing jihadists will attack synagogues during Rosh Hashanah and Yom Kippur, a group of badass rabbis has developed a program to turn your average shul-goer into a lean, mean fighting machine.

The group, which calls itself the International Security Coalition of Clergy, was founded by Rabbi Gary Moscowitz, who boasts a black belt in karate, teaches martial arts and was an NYPD cop for nine years.

He's teaching others basic and advanced fighting moves -- how to take down a terrorist by the neck, how to use a table as cover from gunfire and how to execute a nifty running somersault while drawing a gun -- that he says can be used by Jews if they're attacked by terrorists during prayer.

"We have to be our first responders," Moscowitz told the Post in the video below. "The reason why we have to be our first responders is because even if the police were trained properly by the time they show up we'll all be dead. Even if they show up in three minutes, which is great timing here, a guy with a machine gun could kill everyone." (Hawkins)

Letting professionals -- whether police and other first-responders or private security firm personnel -- do their job is important since they have the experience, expertise, and weaponry needed to do so.

This is why it is imperative for synagogue members to convey any possible threat to police as soon as possible and to ask for extra protection during any time when members might be especially vulnerable. Such times of vulnerability are the High Holidays, but they might also include big parties such as those held for a wedding or a bas mitzvah. While the police will be aware of when the holidays are (although they might have to be reminded of the dates), they will not in general be aware of large gatherings at the synagogue on other days unless they are informed by the members.

Internal conditions such as congregation-specific events can raise the risk for those attending a synagogue, but other events may be keyed to events beyond the local community. The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) notes that part of keeping a synagogue safe requires that members be attuned to what is happening in the world at large. Keeping an ear to international news can be important since extremists in the community might be "inspired" by international events.

Congregation members can make it a regular practice to check in with their local police as well as the regional office of the ADL to determine if there is any information about possible local risks. Risk assessment by synagogue officials and members must also include an assessment of members and programs that might provoke an attack. For example, if a member of the synagogue writes a blog in which he says things that could be interpreted as anti-Muslim, then this action might prompt someone to attack the synagogue. Likewise, if the rabbi and other synagogue members are working with local Muslim leaders to create authentic dialogue, this might also provoke anger in extremists and so would be a red flag for synagogue leaders that extra security might be required.

One of the questions that synagogue leaders must consider is how widely they want to "advertise" the presence of a synagogue. Should there be a large sign welcoming new members and the community at large? Should the nature of the building be kept as tacit as possible? This is a decision that extends far beyond the practical because it calls into question the type of institution that the synagogue wants to be, how welcoming it wishes to be to the community in general. The degree to which the synagogue wants to make its self felt in the community does not necessarily stay at a constant level and may have to be changed over time as the community and the neighborhood changes. For example, if a family planning clinic were to move onto the same block, it would be likely to attract extremists, which might in turn threaten the synagogue.

While it is not reasonable to expect civilians to protect themselves on their own, synagogue users should be aware of the ways in which it might be possible to protect themselves in the time before first-responders to appear. Safety is based in no small measure on the ability to predict potential risks and so planning ahead for possible dangers is an important step that members of the synagogue can take. Police are generally very willing to work with members of the community to help learn how to keep themselves as safe as possible. Among the basic but important plans that the members of this synagogue can take are to have an established evacuation plan and a site for people to meet afterwards to ensure that everyone is out of the building and safe. This seems elemental, but it can be lifesaving. And -- of course -- it is an excellent plan to have in any case, such as the need to evacuate in case of a fire.