Even a mule eventually gets the message!

Burton and Stewart review potential threat on our soil. (See 1 below.)

Training supposed friends who later become enemies. Questionable loyalty carries a price. (See 2 below.)

One British University has come to its senses. (See 3 below.)

Does the low standing of Congress have implications for Democrats? (See 4 below.)

Israel proposes land swap in attempt to move negotiations forward. (See 5 below.)

Palestinians are beginning to tire of Hamas according to a poll. Even a mule gets the message eventually after being hit on the head. (See 6 below.)

Dick

1) Threats, Situational Awareness and Perspective
By Fred Burton and Scott Stewart

In last week's Terrorism Intelligence Report, we said U.S. counter-terrorism sources remain concerned an attack will occur on U.S. soil in the next few weeks. Although we are skeptical of these reports, al Qaeda and other Jihadists do retain the ability -- and the burning desire -- to conduct tactical strikes within the United States. One thing we did not say last week, however, was that we publish such reports not to frighten readers, but to impress upon them the need for preparedness, which does not mean paranoia.

Fear and paranoia, in fact, are counterproductive to good personal and national security. As such, we have attempted over the past few years to place what we consider hyped threats into the proper perspective. To this end, we have addressed threats such as al Qaeda's chemical and biological weapons capabilities, reports of a looming "American Hiroshima" nuclear attack against the United States, the dirty bomb threat, the smoky bomb threat, and the threat of so-called "mubtakkar devices", among others.

Though some threats are indeed hyped, the world nonetheless remains a dangerous place. Undoubtedly, at this very moment some people are seeking ways to carry out attacks against targets in the United States. Moreover, terrorism attacks are not the only threat -- far more people are victimized by common criminals. Does this reality mean that people need to live in constant fear and paranoia? Not at all. If people do live that way, those who seek to terrorize them have won. However, by taking a few relatively simple precautions and adjusting their mindsets, people can live less-stressful lives during these uncertain times. One of the keys to personal preparedness and protection is to have a contingency plan in place in the event of an attack or other major emergency. The second element is practicing situational awareness.

The Proper State of Mind

Situational awareness is the process of recognizing a threat at an early stage and taking measures to avoid it. Being observant of one's surroundings and identifying potential threats and dangerous situations is more of an attitude or mindset than it is a hard skill. Because of this, situational awareness is not just a process that can be practiced by highly trained government agents or specialized corporate security counter-surveillance teams -- it can be adopted and employed by anyone.

An important element of this mindset is first coming to the realization that a threat exists. Ignorance or denial of a threat -- or completely tuning out to one's surroundings while in a public place -- makes a person's chances of quickly recognizing the threat and avoiding it slim to none. This is why apathy, denial and complacency are so deadly.

An example is the case of Terry Anderson, the Associated Press bureau chief in Lebanon who was kidnapped March 16, 1985. The day before his abduction, Anderson was driving in Beirut traffic when a car pulled in front of his and nearly blocked him in. Due to the traffic situation, and undoubtedly a bit of luck, Anderson was able to avoid what he thought was an automobile accident -- even though events like these can be hallmarks of pre-operational planning. The next day, Anderson's luck ran out as the same vehicle successfully blocked his vehicle in the same spot. Anderson was pulled from his vehicle at gunpoint -- and held hostage for six years and nine months.

Clearly, few of us are living in the type of civil war conditions that Anderson faced in 1985 Beirut. Nonetheless, average citizens face all kinds of threats today -- from common thieves and assailants to criminals and mentally disturbed individuals who aim to conduct violent acts in the school, mall or workplace, to militants wanting to carry out large-scale attacks. Should an attack occur, then, a person with a complacent or apathetic mindset will be taken completely by surprise and could freeze up in shock and denial as their minds are forced to quickly adjust to a newly recognized and unforeseen situational reality. That person is in no condition to react, flee or resist.

Denial and complacency, however, are not the only hazardous states of mind. As mentioned above, paranoia and obsessive concern about one's safety and security can be just as dangerous. There are times when it is important to be on heightened alert -- a woman walking alone in a dark parking lot is one example -- but people are simply not designed to operate in a state of heightened awareness for extended periods of time. The body's "flight or fight" response is helpful in a sudden emergency, but a constant stream of adrenalin and stress leads to mental and physical burnout. It is very hard for people to be aware of their surroundings when they are completely fried.

Situational awareness, then, is best practiced at a balanced level referred to as "relaxed awareness," a state of mind that can be maintained indefinitely without all the stress associated with being on constant alert. Relaxed awareness is not tiring, and allows people to enjoy life while paying attention to their surroundings.

When people are in a state of relaxed awareness, it is far easier to make the transition to a state of heightened awareness than it is to jump all the way from complacency to heightened awareness. So, if something out of the ordinary occurs, those practicing relaxed awareness can heighten their awareness while they attempt to determine whether the anomaly is indeed a threat. If it is, they can take action to avoid it; if it is not, they can stand down and return to a state of relaxed awareness.

The Telltale Signs

What are we looking for while we are in a state of relaxed awareness? Essentially the same things we discussed when we described what bad surveillance looks like. It is important to remember that almost every criminal act, from a purse-snatching to a terrorist bombing, involves some degree of pre-operational surveillance and that criminals are vulnerable to detection during that time. This is because criminals, even militants planning terrorist attacks, often are quite sloppy when they are casing their intended targets. They have been able to get away with their sloppy practices for so long because most people simply do not look for them. On the positive side, however, that also means that people who are looking can spot them fairly easily.

The U.S. government uses the acronym TEDD to illustrate the principles one can use to identify surveillance, but these same principles also can be used to identify criminal threats. TEDD stands for Time, Environment, Distance and Demeanor. In other words, if a person sees someone repeatedly over time, in different environments and over distance, or one who displays poor demeanor, then that person can assume he or she is under surveillance. If a person is the specific target of a planned attack, he or she might be exposed to the time, environment and distance elements of TEDD, but if the subway car the person is riding in or the building where the person works is the target, he or she might only have the element of demeanor to key on. This also is true in the case of criminals who behave like "ambush predators" and lurk in an area waiting for a victim. Because their attack cycle is extremely condensed, the most important element to watch for is demeanor.

By poor demeanor, we simply mean a person is acting unnaturally. This behavior can look blatantly suspicious, such as someone who is lurking and/or has no reason for being where he is or for doing what he is doing. Sometimes, however, poor demeanor can be more subtle, encompassing almost imperceptible behaviors that the target senses more than observes. Other giveaways include moving when the target moves, communicating when the target moves, avoiding eye contact with the target, making sudden turns or stops, or even using hand signals to communicate with other members of a surveillance team.

In the terrorism realm, exhibiting poor demeanor also can include wearing unseasonably warm clothing, such as trench coats in the summer; displaying odd bulges under clothing or wires protruding from clothing; unnaturally sweating, mumbling or fidgeting; or attempting to avoid security personnel. In addition, according to some reports, suicide bombers often exhibit an intense stare as they approach the final stages of their mission. They seem to have tunnel vision, being able to focus only on their intended target.

Perspective

We have seen no hard intelligence that supports the assertions that a jihadist attack will occur in the next few weeks and are somewhat skeptical about such reports. Regardless of whether our U.S. counterterrorism sources are correct this time, though, the world remains a dangerous place. Al Qaeda, grassroots jihadists and domestic militants of several different political persuasions have the desire and capability to conduct attacks. Meanwhile, criminals and mentally disturbed individuals, such as the Virginia Tech shooter, appear to be getting more violent every day.

In the big picture, violence and terrorism have always been a part of the human condition. The Chinese built the Great Wall for a reason other than tourism. Today's "terrorists" are far less dangerous to society as a whole than were the Viking berserkers and barbarian tribes who terrorized Europe for centuries, and the ragtag collection of men who have sworn allegiance to Osama bin Laden pose far less of a threat to Western civilization than the large, battle-hardened army Abdul Rahman al-Ghafiqi led into the heart of France in 732.

Terrorist attacks are designed to have a psychological impact that far outweighs the actual physical damage caused by the attack itself. Denying the perpetrators this multiplication effect -- as the British did after the July 2005 subway bombings -- prevents them from accomplishing their greater goals. Therefore, people should prepare, plan and practice relaxed awareness -- and not let paranoia and the fear of terrorism and crime rob them of the joy of life.

2) BY AARON KLEIN

RAMALLAH -- American-run programs that train Fatah militias were
instrumental in the "success" of the Palestinian intifada that began in
2000, a senior Fatah militant told The New York Sun.

"I do not think that the operations of the Palestinian resistance would have
been so successful and would have killed more than one thousand Israelis
since 2000 and defeated the Israelis in Gaza without these [American]
trainings," a senior officer of President Abbas's Force 17 Presidential
Guard unit, Abu Yousuf, said.

America has longstanding training programs at a base in the West Bank city
of Jericho for members of Force 17, which serves as de facto police units in
the West Bank, and for another major Fatah security force, the Preventative
Security Services.

This weekend diplomatic security officials announced that the State
Department will begin training Force 17 again this year in an effort to
bolster Mr. Abbas against Hamas, which took over the Gaza Strip in June when
the terror group easily defeated American-backed Fatah forces in the
territory.

Under an agreement signed this month by Secretary of State Rice and
Palestinian Arab Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, Force 17 officers are slated
to take course work and conduct VIP protection exercises under the State
Department's Bureau of Diplomatic Security.

The new training program aims to help the Palestinian Authority "deliver
security for the Palestinian people and fight terrorism, build confidence
between the parties, and ultimately help to meet the security needs of
Palestinians and Israelis alike," a State Department press release said.

The training program, which includes courses in the use of weapons, paid
with $86.5 million in funding granted to the Palestinian Authority by
Congress in April.

Many members of Force 17 and the Preventative Security Services also openly
serve in Fatah's declared "military wing," Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, which
took credit along with the Islamic Jihad terror group for every suicide
bombing in Israel between 2005 and 2006. The Brigades is responsible for
more terrorism from the West Bank than any other Palestinian Arab
organization.

Abu Yousuf, the Force 17 officer, received American training in Jericho in
1999 as a member of the Preventative Security Services. He is a chief of the
Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades in Ramallah, where he is accused of participating
in anti-Israel terrorism, including recent shootings, attacks against
Israeli forces operating in the city, and a shooting attack in northern
Samaria in December 2000 that killed the leader of the ultranationalist
Kahane Chai organization, Benyamin Kahane.

After the Kahane murder, Mr. Yousuf was extended refuge by Yasser Arafat to
live in the late Palestine Liberation Organization leader's Ramallah
compound, widely known as the Muqata. Mr. Yousuf still lives in the
compound.

Prime Minister Olmert last month granted Mr. Yousuf amnesty along with 178
other Brigades leaders reportedly in a gesture to Mr. Abbas.

Speaking during an interview for the upcoming book "Schmoozing with
Terrorists," Mr. Yousuf said his American trainings were instrumental in
attacks on Israelis. "All the methods and techniques that we studied in
these trainings, we applied them against the Israelis," he said.

"We sniped at Israeli settlers and soldiers. We broke into settlements and
Israeli army bases and posts. We collected information on the movements of
soldiers and settlers. We collected information about the best timing to
infiltrate our bombers inside Israel. We used weapons and we produced
explosives, and of course the trainings we received from the Americans and
the Europeans were a great help to the resistance."

Mr. Yousuf said the training included both intelligence and military
tactics.

"In the intelligence part, we learned collection of information regarding
suspected persons, how to follow suspected guys, how to infiltrate
organizations and penetrate cells of groups that we were working on and how
to prevent attacks and to steal in places," he said.

"On the military level, we received trainings on the use of weapons, all
kind of weapons and explosives. We received sniping trainings, work of
special units especially as part as what they call the fight against terror.
We learned how to put siege, how to break into places where our enemies
closed themselves in, how to oppress protest movements, demonstrations, and
other activities of opposition."

Mr. Yousuf seemed to anticipate criticism for speaking publicly about the
training. He's not "talking about U.S. training in order to irritate the
Americans or the Israelis and not in order to create provocations," he said.
"I'm just telling you the truth."

3) Esteemed UK university rejects boycott
By JONNY PAUL


Members of the University and College Union (UCU) at a prestigious British academic institution have voted overwhelmingly to reject their union's motion to consider a boycott of Israeli academic institutions.

An ad in The Times condemning the academic boycott on Israel
Photo: Courtesy

In a survey commissioned by its UCU branch, 82 percent of UCU members of the Imperial College of Science, Technology and Medicine, said they did not support Motion No. 30, voted on at the UCU conference in May, which calls for the boycott of Israeli academic institutions. Sixteen percent of those surveyed voted in favor of supporting the motion and 2% did not respond.

A larger number of those surveyed said that there should be a national ballot of UCU membership prior to the union adopting any form of boycott. Ninety percent voted for a ballot with 6% disagreeing and 2% not responding

"The members of Imperial College UCU have voted overwhelmingly - by more than five-to-one - to reject Motion 30 - the boycott of Israeli academic institutions," said Imperial UCU member and leading UK academic Michael J. McGarvey, Reader in Molecular Virology at Imperial's Division of Medicine.

"In conjunction with the very similar results from the recent ballots of members at the University of Oxford and the London School of Hygiene and Tropical Medicine, this clearly demonstrates that the vast majority of ordinary members of UCU are against a boycott and the damaging effects that this could have on British academia."

"The huge difference between the votes of individual UCU members and the Congress Delegates, who voted in favor of Motion 30, means that it is now imperative that all ordinary UCU members are consulted on this issue, as soon as possible, by local branch ballots and through a national vote," McGarvey added.

Established in 1907, Imperial College was an independent constituent part of the University of London until July 2007 when it was granted a new royal charter declaring it an independent university in its own right.

4) Weak Congress
By Peter Wehner

According to a new Gallup Poll, Congress’s approval rating has matched its lowest rating ever. Just 18 percent of Americans approve of the job Congress is doing, while 76 percent disapprove. This is a staggering decline for the Democratic-controlled Congress, and it has occurred in only a matter of months. President Bush’s approval rating, at 32 percent, is considerably higher. It turns out that come this fall, he may well have the stronger hand to play.

The collapse in support for Congress tells us several things. First, the American people are in a deeply anti-political mood, and public officials who plausibly can tap into that sentiment and channel it in a constructive way will benefit enormously. The public is looking for a change-agent.

Second, the Democratic Congress has passed almost nothing of consequence; in the current environment, this is ruinous.

Third, Democrats are paying a high price for their hyper-partisanship. They appear angry, zealous, and vengeful, far more interested in investigations than legislation.

Fourth, Democrats are reinforcing the worst stereotypes of the party: weak on national security, in favor of higher taxes and larger government, and beholden to fringe groups.

Fifth, Democratic Party leaders, especially Majority Leader Harry Reid and Speaker Nancy Pelosi, are quite weak, both in their abilities to run the institution and as the public faces of the modern Democratic Party.

The 2006 mid-term election was viewed by many commentators as an enormous set-back for the GOP. While the results were about typical for a second mid-term election for the presidential party in power, they did not usher in days of wine and roses for Republicans, who trail Democrats on the generic ballot and in fund-raising. But Republicans have an opportunity. The anger that was directed toward the GOP is now being re-directed toward Democrats, who are finding that governing is more difficult than merely opposing. This may allow President Bush and Republicans to define themselves against the failures of the 110th Congress, just as Bill Clinton was able to define himself against the mistakes of Newt Gingrich (recall the government shut-down).

The congressional GOP is in desperate need of re-branding after years in power, when the fires of reform dimmed and died. The party now has an opening, one growing larger by the month. Once-cocky Democrats must wonder how things have come undone quite so fast.

5)Israel proposes W. Bank-Gaza route in land swap -quick withdrawal from parts of Jerusalem
By Akiva Eldar

Israel has proposed that safe passage for the Palestinians from the West
Bank to the Gaza Strip be included in an exchange of territory with the
Palestinians in the framework of the agreement of principles now being
formulated ahead of the upcoming regional summit.

The Palestinians will receive control of the route, but Israel will maintain
sovereignty and it will only begin to operate after the Palestinian
Authority, under its present leadership, reasserts control over the Gaza
Strip.

Jerusalem believes that the move will help PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and
Prime Minister Salam Fayad garner public support in Gaza, which will see the
Hamas government as an obstacle in renewing communication with the West
Bank.

A senior official involved in talks with the Palestinians said that the
agreement of principles will not set out the details of the land to be
transfered to the Palestinians in exchange for Israel's settlement blocs,
but will reflect as wide as possible a consensus on the core issues with
some ambiguity. The details will be hammered out in negotiations after the
summit.

It is believed that for the Palestinians, safe passage is worth more than
its nominal territory, and therefore this will be a central component in a
territorial package.

Sources close to Abbas say the PA chairman has removed his objection to the
establishment of a state with temporary borders following the signing of the
agreement of principles, but has conditioned his agreement on international
assurances of a timetable for the end of negotiations on permanent borders.

Internal discussions in Israel along with talks with the Palestinians are
formulating the following positions:

Borders -- The starting point is the separation fence, without additional
areas slated for the expansion of settlements. This leaves 92 percent of the
area of the West Bank in Palestinian hands. The final area of the new state
will be larger than the area east of the fence, but smaller than the area
proposed in the Geneva Accord.

Among themselves, Israeli officials talk about the need to begin applying
the principles of the Evacuation-Compensation Law on West Bank settlers. Two
bills have recently been proposed on this issue, one by Colette Avital
(Labor) and Avshalom Vilan (Meretz), and the other by Amir Peretz and Yuli
Tamir (Labor).

Jerusalem -- According to a government official, Israel would be willing to
transfer to the Palestinians at an early stage a number of neighborhoods and
refugee camps outside the fence and in the area of the Seam Line. At a later
stage, it would transfer more or most of the Arab neighborhoods.

The guiding principle is similar to that of the Clinton Plan: Jewish areas
for Jews and Arab areas for Arabs. The "basin" of sacred sites in the Old
City would be administered jointly by representatives of the three
religions, each responsible for its own sites.

Refugees -- Israel would recognize Palestinian refugee suffering and accept
indirectly some responsibility for the refugees from the 1948 war. Israel
would also take part in an international project to rehabilitate refugees in
Palestine, in areas Israel would transfer to the Palestinians and in the
countries where they are now living.

Israel is basing itself on the clause in the Arab peace plan noting that a
solution to the refugee problem is predicated on Israel's consent.

While the U.S. did not plan the agenda of the summit ahead of time, it sees
the agreement of principles as key to the summit's success and is
encouraging the parties to move ahead on it before the summit. The Americans
believe the agreement greatly improves the chances that Saudi Arabia will
take part in the summit, and will back Abbas and Fayad politically and
economically. To connect the regional summit to the Saudi and Arab
initiatives, the Saudis and the Palestinians want the summit to relate to
the Israel-Syrian issue as well.

6) Palestinian poll finds great support for Western-backed gov't

First survey taken since Hamas' Gaza takeover shows party losing support with 47% of Palestinians saying Fayyad gov't performing better than Hamas. Nonetheless Gazans say personal security has improved since takeover


Palestinians overwhelmingly prefer the Western-backed government of Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad over the ousted Islamic Hamas' government, although residents of the Gaza Strip believe their security has improved since Hamas seized control of the area, according to a poll released Thursday.


The survey by Ghassan Khatib, an independent and respected pollster, was the first since Hamas took over Gaza in five days of bloody fighting in June.


Following the takeover, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas threw Hamas out of the unity government with his Fatah Party and formed his new Cabinet based in the West Bank. Hamas, which continues to control Gaza, refuses to recognize the new government.


In the new poll, 47 percent said the Fayyad government is performing better than the previous Hamas-led Cabinet led by Prime Minister Ismail Haniyeh. In comparison, 24 percent favored Haniyeh's government, while 23 percent said there was no difference between the two governments. Six percent did not answer.


Even in Hamas' Gaza stronghold, 47 percent of respondents said they think the Fayyad government is performing better than Haniyeh's government, compared with 31 percent who say Fayyad is worse.


Still, Gaza residents say their security situation has improved since Hamas took power. The militant group has pledged to restore law and order to the chaotic area, banning public displays of weapons.


According to the poll, 44 percent of Gaza respondents said their personal security has improved, while 31 percent said it has become worse.


However, with Gaza facing isolation and economic hardship, 45 percent of Gazans say the general situation has worsened, while 34 percent say it is better.


The poll indicated diminished support for Hamas, which trounced Fatah in January 2006 legislative elections. When asked which party they support, 34 percent of the respondents said Fatah and 21 percent said Hamas. The same question before Hamas takeover in June brought Fatah 33 percent and Hamas 29 percent.


If presidential elections were held today, Abbas would get 20 percent of the vote, Haniyeh 18 percent and Marwan Barghouti - a Fatah leader imprisoned by Israel - would get 16 percent.



The question did not take into account the possibility that Abbas or Barghouti might pull out of such a race to back the other in a showdown with Hamas. The poll questioned 1,200 people in the Gaza Strip and West Bank and had a margin of error of 3 percentage points.