By Abe Selig and Hilary Leila Krieger – The Jerusalem Post

Hundreds gather for rededication of J’lem synagogue after nearly 62-year hiatus.

After a nearly 62-year hiatus, the renowned Hurva synagogue inside the Jewish Quarter of Jerusalem’s Old City has been rebuilt and is again an operational house of prayer.

Hundreds of people, braving the wind and an unexpected Jerusalem chill, crowded into a courtyard opposite the outer walls of the synagogue on Monday night to take part in an official rededication ceremony for the newly-rebuilt shul – which stands in the exact spot it did before its destruction at the hands of the Jordanian Arab Legion during the War of Independence in 1948.

Meanwhile on Monday, the US State Department criticized Palestinians for stoking tensions at the rededication of the historic synagogue.

“We are deeply disturbed by statements made by several Palestinian officials mischaracterizing the event in question, which can only serve to heighten the tensions we see. And we call upon Palestinian officials to put an end to such incitement,” said US State Department spokesman PJ Crowley. “We are urging all parties to act responsibly and do whatever is necessary to remain calm.”

He added that the US was “not at all” objecting to the rededication itself.

While the ceremony was a great source of joy – both for those inside the ceremony area and for the scores of onlookers who crowded around the cordoned-off area to try and get a glimpse of the goings-on – the Hurva’s rededication has also seen a rise in tensions among Palestinians in the Old City and in east Jerusalem.

Rumors about the synagogue, along with the perceived implications its reconstruction holds for the Temple Mount, have spurred numerous calls from Palestinian leaders to defend Al-Aksa mosque from “Israeli attempts” to destroy it and begin building the Third Temple.

Based on those calls and additional intelligence information obtained by Jerusalem Police, more than 3,000 security forces have been deployed throughout the area since Friday. Additionally, Muslim men under the age of 50 have been prevented from entering the Temple Mount for prayers.

However, speaking inside the Hurva before the ceremony, Ashkenazi Chief Rabbi Yona Metzger attempted to calm these tensions with a message of peace to the Muslim world.

“Pay no attention to malicious slander,” Metzger said. “All we are doing is resurrecting the Hurva, which was destroyed more than 60 years ago. We have no intention of rebuilding the temple, not this week – unless Almighty God sends it to us from the heavens.”

Metzger added, “All the rumors that suggest we will later march on the Temple Mount are just that – rumors; a media spin by anti-Semites who wish us harm.”

Still, the overall tone of the speakers during the ceremony was one of accomplishment and pride at the synagogue’s rebirth.

After a musical rendition of the “shehiyanu” blessing – recited in instances of renewal – by members of the IDF choir, Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat addressed the crowd, saying that the destruction of a Jewish holy site by foreign powers in the heart of the Jewish Quarter was something “we will never again allow to happen.”

While Barkat also sounded a conciliatory tone toward the city’s Muslim residents, he added that “only we, the sovereign power in Jerusalem, know how to guard the city’s holy sites for all three major religions.”

Knesset Speaker Reuven Rivlin, who spoke after Barkat, echoed many of the mayor’s comments, though not before reading words composed by his mother’s grandfather describing the Hurva before its destruction in 1948.

“From the hills surrounding Jerusalem, [the Hurva] rises up,” Rivlin said, visibly moved by the occasion. “And as it rises, it is reminiscent of a moon among the stars in the sky.”

Rivlin went on to speak of the Hurva’s history, beginning with its first incarnation in 1701, when it was constructed by disciples of Judah Hahasid. Its first destruction came some 20 years later, when those same disciples lacked the funds to repay local creditors, who in return burned the Hurva to the ground.

It was nearly 150 years before the Hurva stood again, but in 1864, after a massive construction project was approved by the Ottoman Turks and funds were procured from Jewish communities the world over, a neo-Byzantine Hurva was soon towering over the rest of the Jewish Quarter.

However, that Hurva, which hosted the likes of Theodor Herzl and Ze’ev Jabotinsky before the creation of the state, also met with ruin. The Jordanian army took Jerusalem’s Old City in May of 1948, loaded the building with explosives and set off a blast whose smoke cloud could be seen miles away.

However, as Rivlin spoke to the crowd on Monday night, he vowed that such acts would never again be seen – not in Jerusalem, nor in any other part of the Jewish state.

“Here, we will continue to live, and we will continue to build,” Rivlin said, his voice trembling with emotion. “Because no power in the world can distance us from our land.”

By: – Col. Bob Maginnis

Most Americans want our investment of blood and treasure in Iraq not to have been in vain. Even though Iraq’s progress from dictatorship to democracy appears a success the March 7 election makes it clear that it’s not the time to declare that democracy will be firmly implanted.

Before a brighter future can begin, Baghdad must form a new government. That process promises to be messy, like the political campaign just completed, but then, just maybe, our investment will pay-off in geopolitical dividends.

Last week’s balloting was the most competitive democratic contest for power ever held in the Middle East and Americans should be proud. More than half of the nearly 19 million eligible voters turned out to cast their ballots, choosing from more than 6,200 candidates organized in 86 political groups to gain seats in the 325-member assembly.

The last time that country had a national vote the Sunni Arab population boycotted the elections. There was no boycott this election, and across the landscape, interest in the elections was intense with a higher voter turnout than any recent U.S. national election.

Now we wait for the election outcome expected later this week, and preliminary results are not surprising. They indicate a close race among the mainly Shiite coalition of Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki, a second Shiite group, the Iraqi National Alliance, and Iraqiya, a nationalist and secular ticket that received heavy support in Sunni areas.

The closeness of the vote will complicate the formation of a government which will require two or three of the leading blocs to join together. So far, it looks as though al-Maliki and Iraqiya nationalist leader Ayad Allawi, who briefly served as prime minister in 2004-2005, have the best chances of leading the new government.

A government headed by either al-Maliki or Allawi would be good news for America, because both are proven allies. Al-Maliki signed a strategic framework with the Bush administration in 2008 and has stiff-armed Tehran on multiple occasions. Allawi is a secularist that has close ties with Washington and Arab governments. He’s also a tough leader interested in creating a “clean government.”

Anticipating a strong showing at the ballot box, al-Maliki’s Shiite-based State of Law bloc has already opened talks with rival groups to form a coalition government. However, that process could take months of negotiations because all parties to the coalition will want the chance to put forward nominations for prime minister, recommend issues for the coalition’s platform and jockey for cabinet appointments.

The underlying danger is that disputes over the vote count or prolonged bargaining over the new government will open the way to renewed violence.

But a new government will eventually emerge. The litmus of that government’s success will be the long-term answers to the following questions.

First, can Iraqis govern themselves? So far, the Iraqis have demonstrated the ability to organize elections and develop a political culture, both major accomplishments. Otherwise their governing skills are poor. The parliament is routinely gridlocked and basic services such as electricity are poor at best. The new government has the opportunity to correct that poor record by tackling critical challenges: govern in a non-sectarian manner, resolve its longstanding budget crisis, equitably distribute the country’s oil wealth, resolve territorial disputes between Arabs and Kurds, and build ministries that are effective beyond Baghdad.

Second, are the Iraqis ready to assume the security of their country as American forces withdraw? The U.S. has spent years training and equipping the Iraqi security forces (ISF) for the day American troops withdraw. Last summer U.S. troops began the weaning process by leaving Iraqi cities for remote bases but remain on-call for emergencies.

Now violence is down and has remained low since last summer to the credit of the ISF. U.S. Army Gen. David Petraeus, the commander for American forces in the Middle East, said attacks in Iraq have dropped from an average of 220 per day in 2006 to less than 20 a day over the last six months.

The U.S. will continue the weaning process if the Iraqis stand-up a new government without sparking sectarian violence. “Around early May, if the country is on stable footing, I will begin moving troops out of Iraq,” Gen. Ray Odierno, the U.S. ground commander, said. The U.S. agreed to remove its combat troops by the end of August, followed by the removal of all forces from the country by December 31, 2011.

Third, will Iraq become a democratic model for its totalitarian neighbors? Iraq is a young democracy teetering on training wheels but it’s unique among the Arab world. “Many of the regional powers don’t like our experiment in democracy,” Hoshayr Zebari, Iraq’s foreign minister, said. He continued, “Some of our neighbors look upon this experiment with unease.”

Their uneasiness is understandable. The fact that free elections took place in Iraq with an uncertain outcome at this point shames other Arab states, like the Egyptian regime of Hosni Mubarak, who has been at the helm for three decades or the unelected rulers of Saudi Arabia. It’s noteworthy the Arab media reported on every detail of the Iraqi election process and the Arab street gave the process its rapt attention.

Fourth, will Iraq free itself of terrorists? In 2005, al-Qaeda terrorists shielded by Sunnis, undermined Iraqi democracy with relentless suicide bombings that killed thousands. Last week Iraqi extremists’ threats and scattered violence failed to stop most Iraqis from voting. Hopefully this demonstration of Iraqi devotion to their country’s future, which includes most Sunni voters, means the vast majority will no longer support terror networks inside their country.

Fifth, will Iraq help contain the Iranian threat? Iraq has no intention of being a satrap of the Persian state, but Iran has influence in Baghdad. They may share a long border, commerce, and a common faith, but Iraq does not intend to be Tehran’s patron especially after seeing the conditions imposed by the theocratic regime.

Iraqis are Arabs, not Persians. That ethnic difference trumps the Shia religious connection. They speak different languages and have been at odds for centuries. Invasions have historically been launched against Iran from Iraq such as Saddam Hussein’s war with Iran when Iraq’s Shiites provided most of the soldiers.

But Iran took advantage of the 2003 American invasion of Iraq to establish alliances with Iraqi Shiite political parties. Today, Iran’s main proxies are the Islamic Supreme Council of Iraq and the Iraqi National Alliance.

Recently, Iran used these proxies to influence Iraq’s election by seeking to ban more than 500 Sunni candidates. These proxies used trumped-up charges that Sunni candidates were sympathetic to the former Baathist regime of Saddam Hussein. This approach is eerily similar to the Islamic Republic’s use of its Committee of Experts to disqualify reformist candidates from running in Iranian national elections.

Finally, will Iraq be a stabilizing force in the region? Iraq has long acted as a buffer between the Shiite and Sunni worlds. For most of the Islamic Republic’s existence before the 1991 Gulf War, it was locked in conflict with Iraq which kept the Persians from expanding their influence into Arab lands.

The Arab nations hope Iraq will resume that role now that the U.S. is leaving. For most Arab states Persian regional power sparks fear because they see plenty of Iranian hegemonic activity with Syria, Lebanon, Gaza, and Yemen.

The American project in Iraq created a rare phenomenon — a Middle Eastern government out of the consent of the governed. But only time will tell whether America’s investment of blood and treasure ensures freedom for Iraq, brings long-term stability to the region, facilitates victory over other regional terrorist organizations and prevents Iranian hegemony.

* PA calls Arabs to “defend al Aqsa” Top Fatah official: Israel “playing with fire” through Temple Mount “provocations.”

* Ashton to push for resumption of Israel-Palestine peace talks On the eve of her first trip to the Middle East, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton has said she will urge a restart of peace talks between Israelis and Palestinians.

* Abbas: Iran hampering unity talks PA leader says Iran is impeding efforts to reach a deal between Fatah and Hamas.

* Obama aide condemns “destructive” Israeli homes plan Israel’s announcement of plans to build 1,600 homes for Jews in East Jerusalem was “destructive” to peace efforts, a top aide to Barack Obama says.

* New Terrorist Weapon: “Lawfare” Twists the Law The recently-formed “Lawfare Project” has launched a new type of strategy to fight Muslim-led manipulation of law in its war against democracy.

* Security Fears: Police Cancel Upcoming Temple Mount Activities In light of security assessments in Jerusalem and the rioting of the past few days there, police have canceled the monthly Temple Mount Gates march, scheduled for this Monday night.

* Turkey calls for more active EU foreign policy Turkey has urged the European Union to seek more influence in the South Caucasus and the Middle East, regions where Ankara already considers itself to be a major player.

* “Arms drive” in South East Asia South East Asian nations are ramping up their military capacity in a move that could destabilize the region.

* Israeli envoy sees “historic crisis” with U.S. Israel and the United States are in a “crisis of historic proportions” over a settlement dispute that has brought relations to a 35-year low, Israel’s ambassador to Washington said.

* Israel keeps restrictions on Jerusalem mosque access Israeli police maintained restrictions on access to the Al-Aqsa mosque compound – Islam’s third holiest site – for the fourth day running amid tensions in Jerusalem.

By: – Col. Bob Maginnis

Life as we know it is “severely threatened” by weapons such as “botnets,” “phishing,” “DOS attacks” and “scans” says the U.S. Director of National Intelligence Dennis Blair. Last month, Blair delivered his Annual Threat Assessment to Congress by drawing attention to threats of computer warfare. These weapons, says Blair, could shut down our critical infrastructure and we are woefully unprepared to defend ourselves against them.

Our European allies are even less prepared. Last week, urgent warnings were sounded throughout the European Union and NATO that governments and military institutions lacked effective defenses against this serious and growing threat.

The culprits using these weapons are tech-savvy terrorists, organized criminal groups, and nation states like China. They employ the aforementioned malicious cyber weapons to steal and destroy, and their level of activity has increased exponentially over the past year to an estimated 1.6 billion attacks every month against U.S. Government networks.

The U.S. is especially vulnerable to cyber attacks because virtually all American commerce, infrastructure and government activities are tethered to the Internet. The problem is getting worse not only because the incidents are increasing, but also because hackers keep pace with information technology advances.

Technology advances like network convergence — merging voice and data on a common network structure — and channel consolidation — the concentration of personnel data by service providers — increase information network performance but also increase the potential for exploitation by malicious entities. The culprits are smart and they are tapping into every aspect of our information infrastructure to include these vulnerable advances.

Cyber spies have also reportedly penetrated the U.S. electrical grid and left “zombie” software programs ready on command to disrupt our system. Last year, a senior intelligence official told the Wall Street Journal, “The Chinese have attempted to map our infrastructure, such as the electrical grid,” ostensibly for future attacks. Officials indicate water, sewage and other infrastructure systems are also at risk from malicious cyber manipulation.

Director Blair warns “We cannot be certain that our cyberspace infrastructure will remain available and reliable during a time of crisis.” That’s why realists warn we are living in a pre-9/11 era when it comes to security and resilience of the country’s information infrastructure.

China is one of our most dangerous cyber enemies. Last fall the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission report to Congress found China appears increasingly to be piercing U.S. government and defense industry computer networks to gather data for its military. The report describes growing Chinese military ambitions in cyberspace to develop the capacity to destroy adversary networks.

The Chinese also use their cyber arsenal for business and political ends. They have become very good at cherry-picking information via cyber espionage to make their products more competitive and steal a competitor’s secrets.

In December, Google, the most popular Internet search engine, and at least 20 other companies were victimized by “highly sophisticated and targeted attacks” originating in China. The attacks tried to gain access to the e-mail accounts of anti-Beijing human rights activists.

China’s threat is driven by its rapid economic growth which thirsts for better information, its rapid military modernization, and hundreds of millions of Internet users, mostly young, who in many cases are carefully directed by government efforts.

Doubters about China’s aggressive cyber activities should visit the website https://www.securitywizardry.com/radar.htm. Click on the outline of China on the world map, scroll down to “Top Threat Sources,” and review the statistics for China in each malicious cyber activity category. Four of these activities can become a weapon.

The number of daily denial of service (DOS) attacks originating from China routinely exceeds all other attacks combined, e.g., there were 579 originating from China on March 10 posted on the above website. A DOS attack makes the target network inaccessible.

“Botnets” are basically captured computers that attackers use to remotely control for their malicious purposes. China has captured an untold number of computers in the U.S. and elsewhere and uses them on command to conduct malicious actions.

“Scanning” is a process used to search for computers running a particular service. Scans are often the prelude to an attack, and services scanned by attackers often indicate known vulnerabilities for those services.

“Phishing” is a technique used to mimic legitimate websites, often financial institutions, to steal logins, passwords and personal information.

Consider five approaches to defend against these cyber weapons.

First, create closed networks such as the Secret Internet Protocol Router Network (SIPRNet). SIPRNet is the Pentagon’s system to transmit classified information in a completely secure environment. The drawbacks to a closed network are the expense and no access to non-networked sources. Use of a closed network offers an obvious advantage for critical infrastructure like our electrical grid.

Second, stay ahead of the threats by constantly improving technologies. That has proven to be very difficult and expensive, however. Director Blair acknowledges cyber attackers have “…displayed remarkable technical innovation with an agility presently exceeding the response capability of network defenders.” This is our current approach which is not going well.

Third, grow government and private sector cyber-defense partnerships. Blair concedes, “Neither the U.S. Government nor the private sector can fully control or protect the country’s information infrastructure.” The China-Google incident prompted the National Security Agency (NSA) to partner with Google. Google benefits from NSA’s capacity to process information and the government gains access to information on domestic and foreign actors alike. But private-government partnering should alarm civil libertarians because of the possibility for abuse.

Fourth, launch an international effort to standardize network security in cyberspace like air traffic agreements do the airways. Free trade and Internet access serve our universal interest but nations like China, which rely on cyberspace to repress political dissent and steal technical information, may never cooperate.

Finally, we must consider a get-tough approach. We can identify with good precision the source of many attacks vis-à-vis technologies like the website indicated earlier. The U.S. Government or the military’s new cyber command should police cyberspace for malicious activities directed at American networks – both government and private – and then launch cyber counterattacks either as a warning or to cripple malicious networks.

The current wave of cyber attacks are robbing our technology, gaining personal information for financial exploitation, and could threaten a 9/11-like infrastructure catastrophe. We must treat these attacks like a wave of enemy soldiers assaulting Manhattan or Los Angeles and aggressively do what’s necessary to protect our way of life.