logo
2 more attacks on Jews heighten concerns about security in and around US synagogues

2 more attacks on Jews heighten concerns about security in and around US synagogues

For the leaders of U.S. Jewish institutions, the recent attacks in Boulder, Colorado, and Washington, D.C., are stark reminders of their responsibility to remain vigilant despite years of hardening their security measures and trying to keep their people safe.
Now, they're sounding the alarm for more help after a dozen people were injured in Boulder while demonstrating for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza on Sunday. And just over a week earlier, two Israeli Embassy staffers were fatally shot outside a Jewish museum in Washington.
After that shooting, 43 Jewish organizations issued a joint statement requesting more support from the U.S. government for enhanced security measures. Specifically, they asked Congress to increase funding to the Nonprofit Security Grant Program to $1 billion.
'Every Jewish organization has been serious about security for years. We have to be,' said Rabbi Rick Jacobs, president of the Union for Reform Judaism. 'The grants are to harden the buildings, for things like cameras and glass, and some kind of blockage so they can't drive a truck into the building."
'These are the everyday realities of Jewish life in the 21st century in America. It's a sad reality, but it is an essential responsibility of leadership to make sure that people are first and foremost safe.'
Shira Hutt, executive vice president at The Jewish Federations of North America, said existing federal funds were inadequate, with only 43% of last year's applicants to the grant program receiving funding.
Citing the attack in Boulder, she said increased funding for local law enforcement is also crucial.
'Thankfully, the attack was stopped before even further damage could have been done,' she said. 'This is really now a full-blown crisis, and we need to make sure that we have all the support necessary."
One of the Jewish Federation's state-based affiliates, JEWISHcolorado, on Tuesday launched an emergency fund to raise $160,000 in support of the Boulder community. Its goals include enhancing safety and security measures for Jewish institutions and events.
Strengthening alliances and pushing for results
Leaders of Jewish Federation Los Angeles urged government, business and philanthropic groups to 'supercharge an alliance so we can build mutual understanding, dispel conspiracy theories, and provide rapid response when any group is under threat.'
'Jews here in Los Angeles are terrified but determined,' said the federation's president, Rabbi Noah Farkas. 'We do not need more community meetings, we need results and we are counting on our local government and our law enforcement partners to do more.'
The security costs at 63 Jewish day schools have risen on average 84% since the Israel-Hamas war began on Oct, 7, 2023, according to the Teach Coalition, the education advocacy arm of the Orthodox Union, an umbrella group for Orthodox Judaism.
The coalition is advocating for more state and federal security funding for Jewish schools and camps, as well as synagogues.
The attacks in Washington and Boulder only heighten the urgency, said its national director Sydney Altfield.
'Some people see this as an isolated instance, whether it is in Colorado, whether it's in D.C.,' she said. 'But we have to step up and realize that it could happen anywhere. … It is so important that our most vulnerable, our children, are secure to the highest extent.'
In Florida, Rabbi Jason Rosenberg of Congregation Beth Am said members of the Reform synagogue in the Tampa Bay area 'are feeling very nervous right now and having some additional security might make people a little bit more comfortable.'
He said that 'there's a definite sense that these attacks are not isolated events, that these attacks are, in part, the result of a lot of the antisemitic rhetoric that we've been hearing in society for years now.'
However, he said part of his message as a faith leader in such a climate has been to encourage resilience.
'We can't let this define us. … We can't stop doing what we do; we can't stop coming to synagogue; we can't stop having our activities,' he said. 'Our job is to add holiness to our lives and to the world, and we can't let this stop us from focusing on sacred work.'
Security concerns inside and outside
Jacobs, the Reform Judaism leader, said the latest attacks in Washington and Boulder signaled that new security strategies were needed.
'Yaron Lischinsky and Sarah Milgrim were murdered outside of the event at the D.C. Jewish Museum,' he said.
'And that presented a whole additional sort of challenges for law enforcement and for each of our institutions doing security, which is: you can't just worry about who comes in; you actually have to worry about who's lurking outside, and so, that is part now of our protocols."
The attack in Boulder, he said, took place during a 'peaceful protest' where demonstrators were calling for the release of Israeli hostages in Gaza.
'We have to worry about what happens inside our institutions. … We also have to be thinking and working with law enforcement about what happens outside.'
Jacobs recalled that when a Christian leader recently visited a Reform synagogue, he was 'stunned by the security protocols,' which included procedures that Jacobs likened to passengers passing through airport security.
'I said, 'Well, what do you do in your churches?' and he said, 'Well, we like to be welcoming.' And I said: 'We don't have that luxury. We want to make sure our people feel safe, otherwise people will stop coming.'"
___

Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin
Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin

The Hill

time35 minutes ago

  • The Hill

Hegseth could be ‘on the hook' for hundreds of millions on Qatari jet, says Raskin

The top Democrat on the House Judiciary Committee has warned Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth that he could be 'on the hook' for hundreds of millions of dollars for having accepted a luxury jet from the Qatari government. In a letter sent Wednesday, Rep. Jamie Raskin (D-Md.) argued that Hegseth's formal acceptance of the Boeing 747 jetliner last month – a move made so that the Air Force can upgrade its security measures so it may eventually be used as Air Force One – violates the Constitution emoluments clause. The rule bars federal officials from accepting financial benefits from foreign governments without congressional approval. 'I write now to urge and advise you to promptly mitigate these violations—and your own personal legal exposure—by either returning the plane to the Qatari government or promptly seeking Congress's consent to accept it,' Raskin wrote. The Pentagon announced on May 21 that it had officially accepted the 13-year-old luxury jet previously used by the Qatari royal family, a supposed 'free,' gift that could be used to supplement the aging Air Force One fleet, according to President Trump. The transfer has been criticized by U.S. lawmakers on both sides of the aisle, who say it raises ethical and corruption questions in addition to costing taxpayers hundreds of millions of dollars to retrofit the plane into a secure and working Air Force One. Others have focused on the national security risks of such a gift, saying the aircraft would have to be swept for listening devices. Some have worried that in Trump's push to use the plane before he leaves office, the Air Force will rush security upgrades and cut corners on protection systems. A former professor of constitutional law and former ranking member of the House Oversight Committee, Raskin has focused his criticisms on the ethical issues around accepting the Qatari plane, repeatedly arguing that it requires congressional approval. 'The Constitution is perfectly clear: no present 'of any kind whatever' from a foreign state without Congressional permission,' Raskin wrote on X last month after news of the gift broke. Congress has the authority to block federal officials from receiving gifts from foreign governments, as granted in the Constitution, but the government arm has not held any formal vote to accept the plane or not. Democrats largely have been unsuccessful in stopping Trump from accepting the Qatari jet. Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) last month attempted to pass a bill that would bar the use of a foreign jet as Air Force One, but that effort failed. Raskin, along with other Democrat lawmakers, have introduced resolutions to condemn the gift but Republicans have blocked them from being considered on the floor. Making matters more complicated, Democrats, given their status as the minority party, can't convene any oversight hearings that would force government officials to testify on the issue, and their colleagues across the aisle have not called any such hearings themselves. In his letter, Raskin says Hegseth is in violation of the Foreign Gifts and Decorations Act, which could prompt the Attorney General to bring civil action and penalties against him. Under that law, government officials can accept certain gifts up to $480 in value, and they cannot 'request or otherwise encourage the tender of a gift or decoration' from another country. In violating the act, Hegseth can face a penalty 'not to exceed the retail value of the gift improperly solicited or received plus $5,000.' 'In other words, you may be on the hook for $400 million (plus $5,000) even for a jumbo jet that you accepted on behalf of the President but do not get to personally enjoy,' Raskin writes, referring to the cost of a new Boeing 747-8 jet. 'If you truly believe that there is nothing untoward about the President asking for and receiving a $400 million 'flying palace' from a foreign power, then you should let Congress and the President's Republican colleagues vote to approve the transaction,' he adds. 'If you're unwilling to do that, you must return the plane to Qatar.'

This Gaza Relief Effort Was Doomed to Fail
This Gaza Relief Effort Was Doomed to Fail

Atlantic

timean hour ago

  • Atlantic

This Gaza Relief Effort Was Doomed to Fail

The Gaza Humanitarian Foundation is presiding over an unmitigated disaster, and everything about the U.S.- and Israel-backed group's failure was entirely predictable. After lifting a blockade on relief supplies to the Gaza Strip, Israeli authorities tapped GHF, which is barely months old, as the principal aid-delivery system for starving Palestinian residents. Since its operations began last week, dozens of civilians have been killed by gunfire while seeking to access the food-distribution centers. At least twice this week, GHF suspended its relief efforts in an attempt to improve security. Whatever you think of Israel's conduct during its war against Hamas in Gaza, you should understand that its delivery system for aid was doomed to fail. Israeli authorities and GHF had no realistic plan for what the logistics industry calls 'the last mile'—the process of getting goods from a distribution center to the customer, so to speak. GHF was founded in February and is already on its second leader, a Trump-supporting evangelical Christian public-relations executive. Among the firms that Israel engaged to provide security for distribution sites in southern Gaza is Safe Reach Solutions, a firm led by a former CIA official and staffed by former U.S. military and security contractors that was formed only in January. GHF and SRS are both mysterious, controversial entities whose financial backing is unclear. The organization has defended its work, claiming in a statement yesterday that 'almost 8.5 million meals have been delivered so far—without incident.' GHF also said it is still scaling up. 'Our top priority remains protecting the safety and dignity of those receiving aid,' the statement continued, 'especially as we continue to serve as the only reliable provider of humanitarian assistance to the people of Gaza.' It's true that established aid agencies that have previously worked in Gaza's difficult conditions are not involved in the current effort. Israel cut ties with the UN Relief and Works Agency amid allegations that some of its staff had been involved with the October 7, 2023, terror attack by Hamas; the UN's World Food Program continues to work there but depleted all of its resources in late April. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has clashed with the International Committee of the Red Cross, which lost two of its personnel in an Israeli bombing in May. (The group's leader has called conditions in Gaza 'worse than hell.') World Central Kitchen, which lost seven people in an Israeli strike in Gaza in 2024, closed its soup kitchen in April because it could not deliver food there. With relief agencies either sidelined or unable to deliver resources because of Israel's blockade, Netanyahu then chose, with American backing, the new GHF. But its first leader resigned after a few weeks, citing a lack of 'humanitarian principles' in the Gaza relief effort. Julie Beck: It should not be controversial to plead for Gaza's children Perhaps to help solve logistical questions—and perhaps to add reputational gloss to its efforts—GHF hired the Boston Consulting Group. But after violence broke out, that company withdrew from the contract. Later that same day, GHF appointed its new executive chairman, Johnnie Moore, who insisted that his agency was 'demonstrating that it is possible to move vast quantities of food to people who need it most.' In all cases, an organization delivering goods must optimize distribution routes that align with the community it's delivering to. Israel's lack of trust for experienced relief groups doesn't justify ignoring what those operations learned about moving supplies. Many distribution systems rely on what are known as micro-fulfillment centers—local warehouses, delivery hubs, temporary facilities—to provide goods closer to where the community is. This is why, a few years ago, the COVID-vaccine-distribution efforts that drew so heavily on local doctors and pharmacies were prioritized over larger-scale efforts. Employing many small distribution sites promotes flexibility; the system can adapt to changes in demand. The GHF has provided only four distribution centers, presumably for security reasons, in all of Gaza, down from the 400 that the UN once managed; many Palestinians must now walk hours to have any hope of picking up a food package. No rational system of distribution, under any circumstances, would work this way. GHF increased the security risk by having fewer, not more, distribution sites. The organization also seemed unprepared when tens of thousands of people converged on those sites. Forgive the comparison, but American retail stores planning for Black Friday sales have come to understand—in some cases because of past tragedies at a ' crush point '—the need for information systems that collect data on where the demand is coming from and that help organizations meet that demand quickly. Surely Israel could have anticipated the sheer desperation of Gaza's Palestinians after it cut off relief efforts for months. Especially in hard circumstances, how the last mile will work must be clearly explained to those on the receiving end. In large-scale logistics efforts, the mechanics of how delivery will occur—who needs the information, when they need it, and through which communications channels it will be delivered—are all integral parts of the process. Whole systems of real-time tracking, delivery windows, and notifications are there for Israel to use, even against what it perceives as a hostile population. But information about food availability has been scarce by all accounts. Al Jazeera reported that some announcements last Sunday came from speakers mounted on military drones. The shortage of information led to a rush to the limited number of distribution sites. Business analogies only go so far. An aid site is not a Costco. Palestinian civilians are not retail customers. But perhaps if the Israeli government and its newly chosen relief entity had thought through any of the logistical matters that preoccupy established companies and experienced aid agencies alike, many more Palestinians would be receiving the food aid they badly need, faster and more safely.

Trump may win the fight over the tax bill. But Musk is built for the long war.
Trump may win the fight over the tax bill. But Musk is built for the long war.

Boston Globe

timean hour ago

  • Boston Globe

Trump may win the fight over the tax bill. But Musk is built for the long war.

But while Trump still dominates the short-term politics of the Republican Party, Musk holds a very different kind of power, one that may ultimately outlast Trumpism. He's younger. He's vastly wealthier. And unlike most political rivals, Musk doesn't need a seat in Congress or a friendly Fox News hit to wield influence. He owns the platforms. He runs the systems. And his companies are increasingly intertwined with the United States' future — from space exploration to battlefield communications. Get Starting Point A guide through the most important stories of the morning, delivered Monday through Friday. Enter Email Sign Up This feud didn't erupt out of nowhere. Musk had reasons to be angry. First, the 'Big Beautiful Bill' Advertisement This isn't just a policy spat, it's a power struggle. Trump is playing to win the moment. Musk is building for the long haul. Advertisement Let's start with the obvious: Trump tuns 79 next week. Musk turns 54 at the end of June. Trump is focused on one last political chapter. Musk is laying groundwork for the next several decades. That generational difference shapes everything else. Trump's power is political. Musk's is infrastructural. The president can rally public opinion, bend Congress to his will, and weaponize regulatory agencies. But Musk operates on another level — embedding his companies into the very systems the government depends on. SpaceX is now central to NASA and Pentagon operations. Starlink powers military communications in Ukraine and is quietly becoming indispensable for disaster zones and geopolitical hotspots. Even Tesla, for all its recent volatility, helped create the EV market and still shapes infrastructure policy. If Trump wants to punish Musk, he has tools — the SEC, federal contracts, and regulatory pressure. Heck, one Trump ally believes Trump has reason to deport Musk back to his native South Africa. But the irony is that Trump's own administration might need Musk more than Musk needs Trump, particularly in the next moment of crisis. Then there's media. Beyond the powers of the presidency, Trump's strength is performative — rallies, TV hits, the occasional viral clip. Sure, he also has Truth Social, but that is a niche network. Musk, by contrast, owns the algorithm. As the proprietor of the much more mainstream X (formerly Twitter), he doesn't just post. He shapes the feed. He bans journalists, elevates allies, and controls what trends. But their falling-out signals a deeper shift on the American right — a movement once held together by Trump's gravitational pull is now already fragmenting. One can see that just in the fights over the Big Beautiful Bill. Musk represents a rising faction: tech-aligned, anti-woke, post-party, and less interested in governing than in redesigning systems altogether. Advertisement Of course, Musk is no model of discipline. His erratic tweets and ideological zig-zags make him an unreliable political force. But that's precisely what makes him dangerous. He's not a senator. He claims he is not a donor anymore. He's not trying to be president and, well, he is constitutionally ineligible anyway. Instead, he's trying to shape what the presidency needs. Trump still knows how to land a punch. But Musk might is laying claim to the terrain on which the next generation of political power will be fought. So yes, Trump can still win this fight over a tax bill. But Musk is playing a different game. He's not trying to win a news cycle. He's trying to build the operating system for what comes next. James Pindell is a Globe political reporter who reports and analyzes American politics, especially in New England.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into the world of global news and events? Download our app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store