RSS
Defense in Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial: ‘There is no culture’ that would support killing of Jews
PITTSBURGH (JTA) — In a bid to keep his client off of death row, a lawyer for the gunman who murdered 11 Jewish worshipers in a Pittsburgh synagogue claimed there was “no culture” that endorses killing Jews.
That assertion came during closing arguments in the latest phase of the trial of Robert Bowers, who committed the worst antisemitic attack in U.S. history on Oct. 27, 2018. Last month, the gunman was found guilty on all 63 counts he faced. The segment of the trial that ended Wednesday concerned whether his crimes and intent merit the death penalty.
The defense has argued that the gunman was schizophrenic, and therefore that his intent does not meet the threshold for a death sentence. On Wednesday, defense attorney Michael Burt devoted a large portion of his 90-minute argument to rebutting the claim that the shooter’s antisemitism was not delusional but rather was a product of his white supremacist subculture. That idea was laid out over three days of testimony by the prosecution’s star witness, Park Dietz, a storied forensic psychiatrist.
In an incredulous tone, Burt questioned the idea “that when someone expresses antisemitism, that is normal ideology.”
“It’s certainly not part of a culture,” he went on. “There is no culture that sanctions that you need to kill people to save humanity from an invasion from Jewish groups — that is delusional thinking, it’s not political discourse, in our view.”
Openly calling for the murder of Jews is considered unacceptable in mainstream political discourse, though the idea that Jews posed a lethal threat to the white race undergirded Nazi German state policy from 1933-1945, culminating in the murder of six million Jews in the Holocaust.
The gunman has professed belief in what is known as “replacement theory,” a white supremacist idea that says Jews are orchestrating an invasion of immigrants of color in order to supplant white Americans. He cited that idea on social media shortly before the attack, and it also animated chants at the 2017 neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville. Watchdogs say it has become increasingly popular on the far right. and has been echoed by a number of public figures, including former Fox News host Tucker Carlson.
The gunman’s persistence in his belief in a Jewish threat, Burt said, is evidence of his mental illness. In recent months, the defendant has told psychiatrists, including those called by the defense, that he continues to ascribe to his antisemitic views, and has expressed pride in the attack he carried out.
“Even in capital custody he can’t keep himself from vocalizing these delusions he has, of the country invaded, that he is a soldier at war, that he has a moral imperative to kill Jews — all these crazy delusions,” he said.
In his cross examination of Dietz on Tuesday, Burt tried to get the expert to acknowledge that antisemitism could be a manifestation of insanity. Dietz, a forensic psychiatrist at UCLA’s medical school, has evaluated defendants including John Hinckley, who attempted to kill President Ronald Reagan; mass murderer Jeffrey Dahmer; and Unabomber Ted Kaczynski, among many others.
Dietz said the defendant’s antisemitism was commonplace, rooted in theories articulated by previous violent antisemites. The prosecution, in turn, has contended that there is no evidence the defendant is schizophrenic, and says that his antisemitism is of a piece with white supremacist movements.
In his own argument on Wednesday, U.S. Attorney Eric Olshan argued, as Dietz had, that the shooter drew his thoughts not from his troubled psyche but from external sources. Olshan started with a reference to Gab, a social media site that welcomes the far right, and where the defendant maintained an active account.
“Gab.com told the defendant he had to act and act now,” he said. “He wasn’t even creative. He didn’t come up with any of this on his own, he went to the menu of available white supremacist ideologies and he picked the one he most agreed with.”
The beliefs that he ascribed to “are well known antisemitic tropes that have been around for centuries,” Olshan said. “The defendant’s beliefs are widely held and shared among his subculture. Not one of his extreme beliefs originated from his own mind.”
The jury retired for the day at 4:30 pm, about an hour after arguments had concluded, and will reconvene on Thursday.
If the jury decides the defendant’s crimes and intent meet the threshold for the death penalty, they will reconvene for the next phase of the trial, in which the defense will raise factors that would mitigate against the death penalty, including the shooter’s life hardships. That phase, which could take weeks, would also include testimony from those affected by the shooting, including relatives of the deceased and members of the tight-knit Pittsburgh Jewish community.
If the jury decides the crimes and intent do not meet the death penalty threshold, the trial will end and Judge Robert Colville will hand down a mandatory life sentence without possibility of release.
Behind the scenes, defense and government lawyers have argued about how much the judge should emphasize that the gunman will receive, at minimum, a mandatory life sentence without parole. Defense lawyers want jurors to understand that their client will never see freedom even if the jury decides to keep him off death row.
Colville twice mentioned that outcome, as did Burt, who also reminded the jury, multiple times, that each juror had to make up his or her own mind. A single juror deciding that the defendant does not meet the death penalty threshold would end the trial with a mandatory life sentence.
Soo Song, an assistant U.S.attorney, opened the proceedings on Wednesday by reviewing the crimes the shooter had committed: The six people whom he shot in the head, the elderly woman he shot in the face, the six elderly victims and two brothers who had a mental disability.
Then she read out the names of the victims. “In the interests of justice, find this defendant eligible for the most severe penalty under the law, a sentence of death,” she said.
“For killing Joyce Fienberg, for killing Richard Gottfried, for killing Rose Mallinger, for killing Jerry Rabinowitz, for killing Cecil Rosenthal, for killing David Rosenthal, for killing Bernice Simon, for killing Sylvan Simon, for killing Daniel Stein, for killing Melvin Wax and for killing Irving Younger,” Song said. “And for killing each of them intentionally.”
—
The post Defense in Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial: ‘There is no culture’ that would support killing of Jews appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
RSS
Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives
FILE PHOTO: Boulder attack suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman poses for a jail booking photograph after his arrest in Boulder, Colorado, U.S. June 2, 2025. Photo: Boulder Police Department/Handout via REUTERS
A suspect in an attack on a pro-Israeli rally in Colorado that injured eight people was being held on Monday on an array of charges, including assault and the use of explosives, in lieu of a $10-million bail, according to Boulder County records.
The posted list of felony charges against suspect Mohamed Sabry Soliman, 45, in the attack on Sunday also includes charges of murder in the first degree, although police in the city of Boulder have said on social media that no victims died in the attack. Authorities could not be reached immediately to clarify.
Witnesses reported the suspect used a makeshift flamethrower and threw an incendiary device into the crowd. He was heard to yell “Free Palestine” during the attack, according to the FBI, in what the agency called a “targeted terror attack.”
Four women and four men between 52 and 88 years of age were transported to hospitals after the attack, Boulder Police said.
The attack took place on the Pearl Street Mall, a popular pedestrian shopping district near the University of Colorado, during an event organized by Run for Their Lives, an organization devoted to drawing attention to the hostages seized in the aftermath of Hamas’ 2023 attack on Israel.
Rabbi Yisroel Wilhelm, the Chabad director at the University of Colorado, Boulder, told CBS Colorado that the 88-year-old victim was a Holocaust refugee who fled Europe.
A Department of Homeland Security spokesperson said Soliman had entered the country in August 2022 on a tourist visa that expired in February 2023. He filed for asylum in September 2022. “The suspect, Mohamed Soliman, is illegally in our country,” the spokesperson said.
The FBI raided and searched Soliman’s home in El Paso County, Colorado, the agency said on social media. “As this is an ongoing investigation, no additional information is available at this time.”
The attack in Boulder was the latest act of violence aimed at Jewish Americans linked to outrage over Israel’s escalating military offensive in Gaza. It followed the fatal shooting of two Israel Embassy aides that took place outside Washington’s Capital Jewish Museum last month.
Ron Halber, CEO of the Jewish Community Relations Council of Greater Washington, said after the shooting there was a question of how far security perimeters outside Jewish institutions should extend.
Boulder Police said they would hold a press conference later on Monday to discuss details of the Colorado attack.
The Denver office of the FBI, which is handling the case, did not immediately respond to emails or phone calls seeking clarification on the homicide charges or other details in the case.
Officials from the Boulder County Jail, Boulder Police and Boulder County Sheriff’s Office did not immediately respond to inquiries.
The post Colorado Attack Suspect Charged with Assault, Use of Explosives first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says
Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi attends a press conference following a meeting with Russia’s Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov in Moscow, Russia, April 18, 2025. Photo: Tatyana Makeyeva/Pool via REUTERS
Iran is poised to reject a US proposal to end a decades-old nuclear dispute, an Iranian diplomat said on Monday, dismissing it as a “non-starter” that fails to address Tehran’s interests or soften Washington’s stance on uranium enrichment.
“Iran is drafting a negative response to the US proposal, which could be interpreted as a rejection of the US offer,” the senior diplomat, who is close to Iran’s negotiating team, told Reuters.
The US proposal for a new nuclear deal was presented to Iran on Saturday by Omani Foreign Minister Sayyid Badr Albusaidi, who was on a short visit to Tehran and has been mediating talks between Tehran and Washington.
After five rounds of discussions between Iranian Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi and President Donald Trump’s Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff, several obstacles remain.
Among them are Iran’s rejection of a US demand that it commit to scrapping uranium enrichment and its refusal to ship abroad its entire existing stockpile of highly enriched uranium – possible raw material for nuclear bombs.
Tehran says it wants to master nuclear technology for peaceful purposes and has long denied accusations by Western powers that it is seeking to develop nuclear weapons.
“In this proposal, the US stance on enrichment on Iranian soil remains unchanged, and there is no clear explanation regarding the lifting of sanctions,” said the diplomat, who declined to be identified due to the sensitivity of the matter.
Araqchi said Tehran would formally respond to the proposal soon.
Tehran demands the immediate removal of all US-imposed curbs that impair its oil-based economy. But the US says nuclear-related sanctions should be removed in phases.
Dozens of institutions vital to Iran’s economy, including its central bank and national oil company, have been blacklisted since 2018 for, according to Washington, “supporting terrorism or weapons proliferation.”
Trump’s revival of “maximum pressure” against Tehran since his return to the White House in January has included tightening sanctions and threatening to bomb Iran if the negotiations yield no deal.
During his first term in 2018, Trump ditched Tehran’s 2015 nuclear pact with six powers and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran’s economy. Iran responded by escalating enrichment far beyond the pact’s limits.
Under the deal, Iran had until 2018 curbed its sensitive nuclear work in return for relief from US, EU and U.N. economic sanctions.
The diplomat said the assessment of “Iran’s nuclear negotiations committee,” under the supervision of Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, was that the US proposal was “completely one-sided” and could not serve Tehran’s interests.
Therefore, the diplomat said, Tehran considers this proposal a “non-starter” and believes it unilaterally attempts to impose a “bad deal” on Iran through excessive demands.
NUCLEAR STANDOFF RAISES MIDDLE EAST TENSIONS
The stakes are high for both sides. Trump wants to curtail Tehran’s potential to produce a nuclear weapon that could trigger a regional nuclear arms race and perhaps threaten Israel. Iran’s clerical establishment, for its part, wants to be rid of the devastating sanctions.
Iran says it is ready to accept some limits on enrichment, but needs watertight guarantees that Washington would not renege on a future nuclear accord.
Two Iranian officials told Reuters last week that Iran could pause uranium enrichment if the US released frozen Iranian funds and recognized Tehran’s right to refine uranium for civilian use under a “political deal” that could lead to a broader nuclear accord.
Iran’s arch-foe Israel sees Iran’s nuclear program as an existential threat and says it would never allow Tehran to obtain nuclear weapons.
Araqchi, in a joint news conference with his Egyptian counterpart in Cairo, said: “I do not think Israel will commit such a mistake as to attack Iran.”
Tehran’s regional influence has meanwhile been diminished by military setbacks suffered by its forces and those of its allies in the Shi’ite-dominated “Axis of Resistance,” which include Hamas, Hezbollah, the Houthis in Yemen, and Iraqi militias.
In April, Saudi Arabia’s defence minister delivered a blunt message to Iranian officials to take Trump’s offer of a new deal seriously as a way to avoid the risk of war with Israel.
The post Iran Poised to Dismiss US Nuclear Proposal, Iranian Diplomat Says first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
RSS
The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger
Syrian President Ahmed al-Sharaa speaks during a joint press conference with French President Emmanuel Macron after a meeting at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, May 7, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Stephanie Lecocq/Pool
The dramatic fall of the Assad regime in Syria has undeniably reshaped the Middle East, yet the emerging power dynamics, particularly the alignment between Saudi Arabia and Turkey, warrant profound scrutiny from those committed to American and Israeli security. While superficially presented as a united front against Iranian influence, this new Sunni axis carries a dangerous undercurrent of Islamism and regional ambition that could ultimately undermine, rather than serve, the long-term interests of Washington and Jerusalem.
For too long, Syria under Bashar al-Assad served as a critical conduit for Iran’s destabilizing agenda, facilitating arms transfers to Hezbollah and projecting Tehran’s power across the Levant. The removal of this linchpin is, on the surface, a strategic victory. However, the nature of the new Syrian government, led by Ahmed al-Sharaa — a figure Israeli officials continue to view with deep suspicion due to his past as a former Al-Qaeda-linked commander — raises immediate red flags. This is not merely a change of guard; it is a shift that introduces a new set of complex challenges, particularly given Turkey’s historical support for the Muslim Brotherhood, an organization deemed a terror group by Saudi Arabia and many other regional states.
Israel’s strategic calculus in Syria has always been clear: to degrade Iran’s military presence, prevent Hezbollah from acquiring advanced weaponry, and maintain operational freedom in Syrian airspace. Crucially, Israel has historically thought it best to have a decentralized, weak, and fragmented Syria, with reports that it has actively worked against the resurgence of a robust central authority. This preference stems from a pragmatic understanding that a strong, unified Syria, especially one under the tutelage of an ambitious regional power like Turkey, could pose much more of a threat than the Assad regime ever did. Indeed, Israeli defense officials privately express concern at Turkey’s assertive moves, accusing Ankara of attempting to transform post-war Syria into a Turkish protectorate under Islamist tutelage. This concern is not unfounded; Turkey’s ambitious, arguably expansionist, objectives — and its perceived undue dominance in Arab lands — are viewed by Israel as warily as Iran’s previous influence.
The notion that an “Ottoman Crescent” is now replacing the “Shiite Crescent” should not be celebrated as a net positive. While it may diminish Iranian power, it introduces a new form of regional hegemony, one driven by an ideology that has historically been antithetical to Western values and stability. The European Union’s recent imposition of sanctions on Turkish-backed Syrian army commanders for human rights abuses, including arbitrary killings and torture, further underscores the problematic nature of some elements within this new Syrian landscape. The fact that al-Sharaa has allowed such individuals to operate with impunity and even promoted them to high-ranking positions should give Washington pause.
From an American perspective, while the Trump administration has pragmatically engaged with the new Syrian government, lifting sanctions and urging normalization with Israel, this engagement must be tempered with extreme caution. The core American interests in the Middle East — counterterrorism, containment of Iran, and regional stability — are not served by empowering Islamist-leaning factions or by enabling a regional power, like Turkey, whose actions have sometimes undermined the broader fight against ISIS. Washington must demand that Damascus demonstrate a genuine commitment to taking over the counter-ISIS mission and managing detention facilities, and unequivocally insist that Turkey cease actions that risk an ISIS resurgence.
The argument that Saudi Arabia and Turkey, despite their own complex internal dynamics, are simply pragmatic actors countering Iran overlooks the ideological underpinnings that concern many conservatives. Turkey’s ruling party, rooted in political Islam, and its historical ties to the Muslim Brotherhood, present a fundamental challenge to the vision of a stable, secular, and pro-Western Middle East. While Saudi Arabia has designated the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization, its alignment with Turkey in Syria, and its own internal human rights record, means that this “new front” is far from a clean solution.
The Saudi-Turkey alignment in Syria is a double-edged sword. While it may indeed serve to counter Iran’s immediate regional ambitions, it simultaneously risks empowering actors whose long-term objectives and ideological leanings are deeply problematic for American, Israeli, and Western interests. Washington and Jerusalem must approach this new dynamic with extreme vigilance, prioritizing the containment of all forms of radicalism — whether Shiite or Sunni — and ensuring that any strategic gains against Iran do not inadvertently pave the way for a new, equally dangerous, Islamist crescent to rise in the heart of the Levant.
Amine Ayoub, a fellow at the Middle East Forum, is a policy analyst and writer based in Morocco. Follow him on X: @amineayoubx
The post The Islamist Crescent: A New Syrian Danger first appeared on Algemeiner.com.
You must be logged in to post a comment Login