Uncategorized
Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure
(JTA) — Every Thursday, Brad Orsini gets on a conference call with dozens of other security specialists who, like him, focus on preventing threats to American Jews. But in a few days, and for the coming months, the conference call won’t just address the dangers of the present and future. It will also deal with events that occurred more than four years ago.
That’s because next week marks the beginning of the trial of the gunman who is accused of killing 11 worshippers in a Pittsburgh synagogue in October 2018.
Orsini, who oversaw the city’s Jewish communal security on the day of the attack in the neighborhood of Squirrel Hill, hopes to find a sense of closure in the alleged shooter’s prosecution. But he also knows that the trial threatens to broadcast the white supremacist ideas that lay behind the attack, and continue to pose risks for Jewish communities. And he worries that, in addition to providing a possible pathway for survivors and victims’ families to move into the future, it could also thrust them back into a painful past.
“It’s long overdue,” Orsini said. “This has been looming large over the Pittsburgh community and, quite honestly, the Jewish community in the nation. We’re all looking toward finishing this trial and prosecuting this actor for what he did.”
At the same time, he added, “This trial is going to reopen wounds that this community has suffered for almost five years now, and it’s going to have the ability to retraumatize many people in the community. And we have to be concerned about that.”
Beginning on Monday, those countervailing emotions and expectations will come to bear as the deadliest antisemitic attack in American Jewish history is litigated in court. The trial, which will begin with jury selection, is expected to last about three months. Few doubt the guilt of the accused shooter, Robert Bowers, whose name is hardly uttered by Jewish residents of Squirrel Hill. But what remains unclear is what the trial will mean for American Jews — and for the families most directly affected by the attack.
Some hope for the defendant to get the death penalty — even though that will mean prolonging the legal ordeal — while others have advocated against it. Some hope for the trial to shed light on the threat of white supremacy, even as renewed attention on the attack could inspire other violent extremists. And some hope the trial will help them move past the tragedy, even as they know it will be difficult to hear the details of the shooting laid out in court.
“The country is going to have to undergo this unprecedented trial of the country’s worst mass killer of Jews,” said Jonathan Greenblatt, CEO of the Anti-Defamation League. “It’s going to be really hard, so I think our community is really going to have to buckle down and brace ourselves.”
The attack on Saturday morning, Oct. 27, 2018, killed 11 people from three congregations, all of which met at the same building, and injured six others, including four police officers. The defendant faces 63 criminal charges, including hate crimes and murder charges. He has pleaded not guilty. The prosecution is seeking the death penalty — a choice some relatives of victims are vocally supporting. Previously, leaders of two of the three congregations that suffered the attack had opposed the death penalty in this case.
“This massacre was not just a mass murder of innocent citizens during a service in a house of worship,” Diane Rosenthal, sister of David and Cecil Rosethal, who died in the attack, told local journalists, according to reporting by the Pittsburgh Union Progress. “The death penalty must apply to vindicate justice and to offer some measure of deterrence from horrific hate crimes happening again and again.”
For the survivors and families of victims, the trial will likely be especially painful. Some told the Pittsburgh Jewish Chronicle that they intend to take time off work, delay a vacation or be away from family for an extended period of time to be present at the proceedings.
“I want to see justice happen, but at the same time, I hate to think about the families having to potentially see images of what happened and things of that sort,” Steve Weiss, who survived the attack, told the weekly Jewish newspaper. “I’m sure they have mental images, but to have to actually see photos of victims and things of that sort I think can really be difficult for them.”
One thing few people question is the shooter’s guilt, despite his plea of not guilty. He offered to plead guilty in 2019 in exchange for taking the death penalty off the table, but prosecutors, determined to pursue capital punishment for the crime, rejected the plea.
It was the same thing that had happened in the case of the man charged with killing nine Black worshippers in a Charleston, South Carolina, church in 2015. But there, despite the rejected guilty plea, the trial took place a year and a half after the attack, and the shooter was sentenced to death. (In an illustration of the length of death penalty cases, his latest court proceeding happened in October, and he has not yet been executed.)
In contrast, the Pittsburgh trial is not starting until four and a half years after the shooting there. Part of the reason for the delay stems from the work of the defense team, which has pushed back the trial through various court filings. The alleged shooter’s lead attorney, Judy Clarke, has defended a series of high-profile attackers: the Unabomber, the attacker in the 1996 Atlanta Summer Olympics bombing and the Boston Marathon bomber, among others. According to Pittsburgh’s local CBS affiliate, her singular goal is to avoid the death penalty for her client.
But in many other ways, the parallels between the Charleston trial and this one are clear. Both concern shootings by alleged white supremacists in houses of worship, tragedies that have become gruesome symbols of a national rise in bigotry. In both, the culpability of the defendant was assumed before the trial began. Like the Pittsburgh defendant, the Charleston shooter has been lionized by white supremacists, including some who cited him as an inspiration for their own violent acts.
And in both cases, there is an understanding that a conviction does not heal the wounds opened by the shooter.
“This trial has produced no winners, only losers,” said the judge in the Charleston shooter’s trial, Richard Gergel, according to the New Yorker. “This proceeding cannot give the families what they truly want, the return of their loved ones.”
Still, some who are watching the Pittsburgh trial closely hope that it will bring new facts and connections to light. Amy Spitalnick, the executive director of Integrity First for America, a nonprofit that spearheaded a multimillion-dollar victory in a civil trial against the organizers of the 2017 far-right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, hopes that the Pittsburgh trial illustrates the links among different white supremacist shootings — such as the attacks in El Paso, Texas; Christchurch, New Zealand; and at a synagogue in Poway, California.
Those attackers spouted similar conspiracy theories and referenced other recent violent attacks in their manifestos. Spitalnick said that the accused Pittsburgh shooter allegedly communicated with the organizers of the Charlottesville rally on the social network Gab, which is known as a haven for right-wing extremists.
“Trials like this can really be illustrative of how deep the poison of white supremacy and antisemitism goes,” she said. In the Charlottesville trial, she said, “The reams and reams of evidence… really helped pull back the curtain on what motivated the defendants, how they operated, the tools and the tactics of the movement, the conspiracy theories at its core.”
There’s also the possibility that, with the attack resurfacing the shooter’s motivations, and putting him back in the spotlight, it will act as an inspiration for other white supremacists. In the years following the synagogue shooting, Pittsburgh became a kind of pilgrimage site for the defendant’s admirers — leading to continued harassment of local Jews.
“We’re giving a platform to an individual who is a Jew hater, who wanted to kill all Jews,” Orsini said. “What does that spark in other like-minded people? We need to be very cognizant throughout this trial on what kind of chatter is going to be out there on the deep dark web, or even in open portals.”
In the face of concerns about retraumatization, Greenblatt said the ADL is preparing resources on how to discuss the trial with students and amid the Jewish community.
“To relive the horrors of, the grief of, the event — this thing being constantly in the news — it’s going to be hard to avoid, it’s going to be difficult and it could be grisly and upsetting,” Greenblatt said. “I would much prefer this trial didn’t happen — I would much prefer this crime never happened, I would much prefer that those people were all still with us today — but this is where we are.”
He added, “If there might be some ability to raise awareness among the non-Jewish population of what we’re facing, [that] would be of value.”
One potential challenge for American Jews as a whole, Spitalnick said, is that federal prosecutors don’t necessarily share the needs of Jews who will be following the proceedings. While the trial will conjure a mix of emotions for Jews locally and beyond, she said, prosecutors will be more focused on the nuts and bolts of what happened that day and the details of the accused attacker’s actions and motives.
“We’re going to probably spend a lot of time hearing from the prosecution about what motivated him, but it’s not through the lens of what we as Jews think about when we think about Jewish safety,” she said. “It’s through the lens of making the case that this guy did what he did motivated by this extremism and hate… It’s going to be very deliberate and tactical and precise, versus where we as American Jews have been thinking about this from a deeply personal, communal safety perspective.”
The deliberate and detailed work of prosecutors, however, may not be at cross purposes with the emotional needs of Jews, Orsini said. When the trial ends, he said, the establishment of Bowers’ guilt may itself prove to be transformative for how Jews relate to the tragedy, in Pittsburgh and beyond.
“The fact that this individual has not been fully brought to justice… and is not convicted yet of this mass shooting — in some way, yes, that closure and finality will be done at the end of this trial,” he said. “The community can kind of regroup and truly become resilient once this phase is over with.”
—
The post Long-delayed Pittsburgh synagogue shooting trial to begin Monday, igniting pain, fear and hopes for closure appeared first on Jewish Telegraphic Agency.
Uncategorized
Israel Expects to Keep Regional Military Edge Despite Planned Sale of F-35s to Saudi
An F-35 jet performs at the Dubai Airshow in Dubai, United Arab Emirates, Nov. 17, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Amr Alfiky
Israel expects to maintain access to more advanced US weaponry, a government spokesperson said on Thursday when asked about Washington’s plan to sell F-35 warplanes to Saudi Arabia.
Israel is the only Middle East country operating the F-35, one of the most advanced warplanes ever built. US law guarantees Israel a “qualitative military edge” in the region.
“The United States and Israel have a long-standing understanding, which is that Israel maintains the qualitative edge when it comes to its defense,” spokesperson Shosh Bedrosian told reporters.
“That has been true yesterday, that has been true today, and the Prime Minister [Benjamin Netanyahu] believes that will be true tomorrow and in the future,” she said.
The spokesperson’s remarks were the first official comment from the Israeli government on the Saudi sale, announced earlier this week by President Donald Trump.
Saudi Arabia does not officially recognize the state of Israel. Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman, Saudi Arabia’s de facto ruler, said during a visit to Washington this week that the kingdom wanted official ties with Israel but also wanted to ensure a clear path for a two-state solution with Palestinian independence.
Israel‘s Netanyahu opposes Palestinian statehood.
US officials have said the Saudi jets will not have superior features found in Israel F-35 fighters, which include advanced weapons systems and electronic warfare equipment.
Uncategorized
UN Nuclear Watchdog Board Passes Resolution Demanding Answers, Access From Iran
People arrive for the quarterly board of governors meeting at the IAEA headquarters in Vienna, Austria, Nov. 19, 2025. Photo: REUTERS/Elisabeth Mandl
The UN nuclear watchdog‘s 35-nation Board of Governors passed a resolution on Thursday saying Iran must inform it “without delay” of the status of its enriched uranium stock and bombed atomic sites, diplomats at the closed-door meeting said.
The resolution‘s purpose was primarily to renew and adjust the International Atomic Energy Agency’s mandate to report on aspects of Iran‘s nuclear program, but it also stated Iran must quickly provide the IAEA with the answers and access it wants, five months after airstrikes by Israel and the US.
Iran, which says its nuclear aims are entirely peaceful, warned before the US and Europe’s top three powers submitted this resolution that if it passed, it would “adversely affect” Tehran’s cooperation with the agency.
“Our message is clear: Iran must resolve its safeguards issues without delay. It must provide practical cooperation through access, answers, restoration of monitoring, to enable the agency to do its job and help rebuild confidence,” the US, Britain, France, and Germany said in a statement to the board.
IAEA: VERIFICATION IS ‘LONG OVERDUE’
The resolution passed with 19 votes in favor, three against and 12 abstentions, diplomats at the meeting in Vienna said. Russia, China, and Niger were the countries that opposed it.
“Iran must … provide the agency without delay with precise information on nuclear material accountancy and safeguarded nuclear facilities in Iran, and grant the agency all access it requires to verify this information,” the draft resolution text submitted to the board and seen by Reuters said.
Iran still has not let inspectors into the nuclear sites Israel and the United States bombed in June, and the IAEA says that accounting for Iran‘s enriched uranium stock, which includes material close to bomb-grade, is “long overdue” and the issue needs to be addressed “urgently.”
The IAEA cannot inspect the bombed facilities or verify Iran‘s uranium stock until Tehran submits a report updating it on what has happened to them. The bombed sites include Iran‘s three enrichment plants that were operating at the time.
When Israel first bombed Iran‘s nuclear sites on June 13, the IAEA estimates that Iran had 440.9 kg of uranium enriched to up to 60% fissile purity, a short step from the roughly 90% of weapons-grade, in a form that can easily be enriched further.
Iran says it can enrich to whatever level it wants in view of its peaceful objectives.
That is enough in principle, if it were to be enriched further, for 10 nuclear bombs, according to an IAEA yardstick.
THERE WILL BE ‘CONSEQUENCES,’ IRAN SAYS
Western powers say there is no civil explanation for enriching to such a high level, and the IAEA says it is “a matter of serious concern.”
“We are of the firm view that any provocative action – such as the introduction of yet another resolution – would jeopardize and potentially nullify the considerable efforts undertaken by the [IAEA] Director General and Iran to advance dialogue and cooperation,” Iran said in a joint statement to the board with allies including Russia, China, Cuba, and Belarus.
The IAEA and Iran announced an agreement in September in Cairo that was supposed to pave the way towards full inspections and verification, but Tehran said last month that deal is void.
“I’m afraid the resolution will have its own consequences,” Iran‘s ambassador to the IAEA, Reza Najafi, told reporters after the vote. Asked what those were, he said: “We will announce the consequences later.”
The only specific measure announced by Iran soon afterwards was that it was formally notifying the IAEA of the Cairo agreement’s termination.
Uncategorized
The Evidence Says That Al Jazeera Collaborates With Hamas
The Al Jazeera Media Network logo is seen on its headquarters building in Doha, Qatar, June 8, 2017. Photo: REUTERS/Naseem Zeitoon
Al Jazeera’s leadership shake-up has been in the headlines. But will its new executives direct the Qatari state-funded media arm to cease its cozy relationship with Hamas?
Allegations have been swirling that the royal family’s soft power news outlet is not merely reporting what Hamas says — but is actively collaborating with the terrorist organization.
Al Jazeera sells its content to major wire services like the AP and Reuters. Al Jazeera has resource-sharing agreements that allow outlets like CNN to access Al Jazeera’s footage and Al Jazeera to use CNN’s news feed.
Al Jazeera also has arrangements with BBC, France 24, and The Guardian that enable them to use Al Jazeera’s video footage and reports. Other media outlets, including Deutsche Welle and Euronews, have direct syndication arrangements, allowing them to use Al Jazeera’s content without intermediaries.
Credible reports indicate that Al Jazeera’s ties to Hamas extend well beyond journalism. Evidence points to coordination between the Qatari network and Hamas terrorists, raising serious reputational and policy questions for Al Jazeera and for media or corporate partners that cooperate with it.
Reporters Working for Both Al Jazeera and Hamas
Six Al Jazeera journalists simultaneously worked for Hamas or Palestinian Islamic Jihad (PIJ), according to evidence seized by the Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) that has been made public.
Three have since been killed in Gaza. At any credible outlet, concurrently working for a US-designated terrorist organization would result in immediate dismissal. Not so with Al Jazeera. The absence of accountability speaks volumes.
Some of these journalists reportedly participated in Hamas’ October 7, 2023, assault, joining the terrorists who breached and burned Israeli kibbutzim near Gaza, massacring nearly 1,200 and kidnapping 250 others.
Media and corporate partners should have immediately paused collaboration with Al Jazeera until a credible internal investigation was conducted. But it appears that no such credible investigation occurred. Instead, the network issued denials that its reporters were working with Hamas.
Al Jazeera’s Role in Hamas’ October 7 Plan
The New York Times reported that Hamas’ October 7 massacre involved a detailed media strategy. This appeared to include a role for Al Jazeera, which aired prerecorded messages from Hamas commanders during the attack to inspire Arabs outside of Gaza to join in the fighting.
Al Jazeera’s reported collaboration as part of Hamas’ media strategy was not some innocuous business deal. Documents seized by the IDF reveal the terror group sought to ignite uprisings among Palestinians in the West Bank, Israeli Arabs, and Iranian proxies like Hezbollah on Israel’s northern border. One seized memo from 2023 stated that “two or three operations in which an entire neighborhood, kibbutz, or something similar will be burned” must occur to galvanize others.
There could be no credible denial about what was taking place. Hamas actively sought to broadcast its atrocities. Intercepts show that around 10 a.m. on October 7, a Hamas battalion commander, Abu Mohammed, ordered his fighters to “start setting homes on fire,” shouting “Burn, burn” and “I want the whole kibbutz in flames.”
Another six-page handwritten plan attributed to Hamas leader Yahya Sinwar directed militants to “stomp on the heads of soldiers,” shoot them “at point-blank range,” and “slaughter some with knives.”
Commanders repeated and executed these orders in real time. “Slit their throats,” one said. “Kill everyone on the road. Kill everyone you encounter.” Another instructed, “Take a lot of hostages.”
According to a podcast featuring Ronen Bergman, a coauthor of the New York Times piece, Hamas wanted to showcase its “success” by showing Israelis dying, homes burning, and tanks exploding to convince allies that the destruction of Israel could be achieved.
Al Jazeera’s role was to spread this message, airing prerecorded communications from Hamas military chief Mohammed Deif, who proclaimed: “The day has come when anyone who has a gun should take it out. Now is the time. If you do not have a gun, take up your cleaver, axe, Molotov cocktail, truck, tractor, or car.”
Bergman explained that these speeches were “coordinated” and “perfectly synchronized” with Al Jazeera’s broadcasts.
A Hamas commander named Abu al-Baraa, according to intercepted communications, told Hamas terrorists invading Israel: “Document the scenes of horror, now, and broadcast them on TV channels to the whole world. Slaughter them. End the children of Israel.”
During and after the attack, Al Jazeera broadcast footage of the massacre while also airing Hamas’ messages, essentially serving as the group’s propaganda arm.
Throughout the war, Al Jazeera aired exclusive footage from Hamas tunnels, portraying the terrorist group as resilient rather than exposing its use of civilian areas for terror operations. It’s telling that Al Jazeera’s coverage portrayed Hamas as winning, while the network refrained from any criticism of the terrorist group’s leadership, tactics, hoarding of humanitarian aid, or harm done to Gazans for starting the war.
Internal Hamas communications dated before October 7 also show that the group instructed Al Jazeera to use specific terminology and limit visuals of failed rocket launches that fell inside Gaza. Al Jazeera reportedly complied with these instructions.
Direct Dial: Hamas’ Line Into Al Jazeera
Evidence found by the IDF and analyzed by the Meir Amit Intelligence and Terrorism Information Center reveals that Hamas and Al Jazeera maintained a structured communications pipeline throughout the Israel-Hamas war. The captured Hamas documents show the creation of a “secure phone line” — referred to as the “Al Jazeera phone” — linking Hamas’ military operations room in Gaza directly to “Al Jazeera’s management offices in Doha.”
The line reportedly allowed Hamas to “control coverage in real time” by transmitting instructions on which events to air, what terminology to use, and which images to suppress.
Additional documents revealed that Hamas operatives sent media directives to Al Jazeera’s newsroom with detailed guidance on editorial framing. One 2022 memo urged the network to “minimize” images from a failed rocket launch that killed Gazan civilians and to avoid using the term “massacre” to refer to the event.
A subsequent Hamas media directive requested that Al Jazeera journalists coordinate with the movement’s “military media unit” before broadcasting material about the PIJ, ensuring consistency with Hamas’ narratives.
The Meir Amit Center described this pattern of coordination as “neither random nor isolated but systematic, organized and continuous.”
Why the Journalism World Should be Alarmed
Those who partner and collaborate with Al Jazeera cannot dismiss these findings as mere considerations. Continued cooperation with a network that coordinates with Hamas carries reputational, ethical, and potentially legal consequences. The same scrutiny applied to financial institutions accused of directly or indirectly supporting terror should extend to media entities that amplify or assist it.
Toby Dershowitz is a senior advisor at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, where Asher Boiskin is an intern. Follow them on X @TobyDersh and @asherboiskin.