A Brooklyn man has been found guilty of hate crimes in connection with a string of assaults and harassment incidents, including an attack on a Jewish couple who photographed him tearing down posters of Israeli hostages being held in Gaza.
Skiboky Stora was convicted in New York state court of assault, stalking and harassment tied to what prosecutors described as multiple anti-female, anti-white and antisemitic episodes that took place between 2023 and 2024.
According to prosecutors, one of the incidents occurred when Stora was seen removing posters of Israeli hostages. After a husband and wife photographed him, he allegedly followed them while shouting threats and slurs, including “Die, Jews, die!”
The 42-year-old defendant, who lives in Brooklyn, also admitted during the trial that he punched a woman at random as she walked along a Manhattan street nearly two years ago. He chose to represent himself during the weeks-long proceedings in Manhattan.
In his closing statement, Stora denied harboring racist motives or intending to harm anyone. “I never did anything racist to anybody, and I never did anything discriminating against anybody, and I never tried to injure anybody,” he said, according to the New York Post.
Prosecutors countered that claim by presenting video evidence. Footage introduced at trial showed Stora confronting the Jewish couple, as well as additional videos he recorded of himself yelling at and harassing white individuals, the Post reported.
Following the verdict, Manhattan District Attorney Alvin Bragg condemned the conduct. “The victims were met with both violence and harassment simply because of who they are,” he said in a statement. “Hate crimes strike at the core of our city’s values and sense of safety.”
Stora was taken into custody after the conviction. He is scheduled to be sentenced on April 14.
Attempts to reach him through his Instagram account, where he describes himself as the “great great grandson” of the Black nationalist Marcus Garvey and claims to be running for governor as a Republican, were not immediately successful.
One of the assaults, which occurred on March 25, 2024, drew significant public attention after the 23-year-old victim shared her experience on TikTok and others came forward reporting similar encounters.
Prosecutors said Stora’s punch knocked the woman to the ground, leaving her with pain and swelling on the left side of her head.
In a separate incident months earlier, authorities said Stora struck a 17-year-old student in the neck with his elbow and told the teen, “You people think you can do whatever you want,” adding a profanity.
He was also accused of elbowing a 37-year-old woman in the shoulder in another encounter, causing visible bruising.
{Matzav.com}
The Jewish community of Zurich has finalized the creation of an eruv following formal discussions with city officials and in accordance with Swiss law, describing the effort as a model of respectful collaboration between a religious minority and municipal authorities.
Community representatives said the halachic arrangement, which allows observant Jews to carry necessary items on the Sabbath within a defined area, received official approval after a structured consultation process. They emphasized that the project was completed transparently and in full compliance with local regulations.
In the wake of Zurich’s initiative, conversations have begun in other Swiss municipalities about implementing similar arrangements. At the same time, the development has sparked criticism from Mauro Poggia, a member of the Swiss Council of States representing the Canton of Geneva, who voiced objections in two separate public statements.
In one statement, Poggia criticized Israel and referenced a series of unrelated events, including the deadly avalanche at the Crans-Montana ski resort, the October 7 massacre, and the war in Gaza. In a separate statement addressing the eruv directly, he said he was “shocked” by the initiative and argued that it might lead to a clearly defined Jewish residential zone, which he characterized as a “voluntary ghetto.”
Jewish organizations throughout Switzerland strongly rejected those remarks, saying that invoking the term “ghetto” in connection with an eruv was both historically inaccurate and deeply offensive. They underscored that an eruv neither segregates residents nor restricts the public, but serves a limited religious function within Jewish law.
Rabbi Noam Hertig, the chief rabbi of Zurich, explained that the eruv was established through constructive dialogue and mutual respect with municipal officials. He clarified that it is a symbolic halachic framework rather than a physical enclosure, and noted that it is especially important for elderly individuals, people with disabilities, and parents of young children who would otherwise be unable to leave their homes on the Sabbath.
Rabbi Michael Ben-Edmon of Geneva said the backlash reflects what he described as a wider tendency to challenge Jewish religious observance under the guise of liberal principles. He cautioned that such rhetoric risks pushing Jewish life out of the public sphere instead of addressing antisemitism.
Rabbi Pinchas Goldschmidt, president of the Conference of European Rabbis and Av Beit Din of Switzerland, said it was inappropriate to connect unrelated tragedies to a local religious accommodation. He added that presenting an eruv as coercive or exclusionary misrepresents both Jewish law and historical fact, and damages efforts to promote mutual respect and peaceful coexistence.
{Matzav.com}
A tribunal in the Australian state of Victoria has determined that the chant “All Zionists are terrorists,” shouted during a rally in central Melbourne, amounted to racial and religious vilification rather than protected political expression about Israel’s war against Hamas in Gaza, according to local media reports.
The case was brought by Melbourne Jewish community advocate Menachem Vorchheimer against Hash Tayeh, a former owner of the Burgertory restaurant chain and a well-known anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian activist. Tayeh led the chant at a protest held in May 2024.
In testimony cited by the Victorian Civil and Administrative Tribunal, Vorchheimer described the personal impact of the slogan. “The notion of being labeled the derogatory term of ‘terrorist’ for something I have no responsibility for, and for that to be seen as normal, is gut-wrenching and soul-destroying to me,” he said. “I felt dehumanized. I felt like the lowest of the low. I no longer feel safe going into the Melbourne CBD, given I am identifiably Jewish.”
Tayeh contended that the chant was aimed at the Israeli government and those who support its policies, not at Jewish people as a group. He argued that protest slogans often distill complex political views into sharp, provocative language.
The tribunal rejected that argument. Citing the Racial and Religious Tolerance Act 2001, it concluded that because a substantial majority of Australian Jews identify as Zionists, the slogan did not meaningfully separate political ideology from Jewish identity and therefore amounted to incitement of hatred against a racial and religious community.
In her ruling, Judge My Anh Tran dismissed the claim that the chant was shielded as political speech, writing, “There is no right to a catchy rally slogan.”
The Jewish Center for Law and Justice, an Australian organization that monitors antisemitism, praised the outcome. Its chief executive, Alessandra Steele, described the decision as a landmark that “draws an important line in the sand.”
Steele added that for many Jewish Australians, Zionism is deeply intertwined with cultural, religious and familial ties to Israel, and said that branding an entire group as terrorists “serves to reverse victim and perpetrator, inciting hatred and division.”
{Matzav.com}
The United States has reportedly presented Iran with sweeping conditions in ongoing nuclear negotiations, demanding that Tehran dismantle its three primary nuclear facilities and ship its stockpile of enriched uranium to the United States as part of any future agreement.
According to officials familiar with the discussions, the American proposal calls for Iran to take apart key components of its nuclear infrastructure at its main enrichment sites and surrender its accumulated enriched uranium to U.S. custody. The move would represent a far more stringent framework than previous arrangements, aiming to permanently restrict Iran’s ability to produce material that could be used for nuclear weapons.
The three sites at the center of the demand are understood to be Iran’s principal nuclear facilities, long viewed by Western governments as critical to the country’s enrichment capabilities. U.S. negotiators are said to be seeking full dismantlement rather than temporary suspension or monitoring measures.
The proposal also includes the transfer of Iran’s enriched uranium stockpile out of the country. Such a step would remove material that could potentially be further enriched to weapons-grade levels, addressing one of Washington’s primary security concerns.
Iranian officials have previously maintained that their nuclear program is intended solely for peaceful purposes and have resisted calls to eliminate enrichment entirely. Tehran has historically insisted on its right to maintain civilian nuclear capabilities under international agreements.
The renewed push comes amid heightened tensions over Iran’s nuclear activities and ongoing diplomatic efforts to prevent further escalation. President Donald Trump has publicly backed a hardline negotiating approach, signaling that any agreement must ensure that Iran cannot reconstitute a nuclear weapons capability.
It remains unclear how Tehran will respond to the latest demands. Past rounds of talks have stalled over disagreements regarding enrichment limits, sanctions relief, and verification mechanisms. The outcome of the current negotiations could shape the future of U.S.-Iran relations and broader stability in the region.
{Matzav.com}
