Professors working on behalf of oppressive left-wing regimes? Really? Who knew?
A Florida professor admitted Tuesday he had been a Cuban spy for nearly 30 years, and his wife — also a professor — admitted she knew of his conduct, authorities said.
Both Carlos Alvarez and his wife Elsa pleaded guilty to lesser charges in federal court in Miami.
The couple entered their pleas as part of a deal to avoid a jury trial on previous charges of being Cuban agents who failed to register with the U.S. government, the Miami Herald reported Tuesday.
The more serious offense could have put the couple in prison for a decade, the paper said.
A psychology professor at Florida International University, Alvarez faces up to five years in prison for conspiracy to become an unregistered foreign agent.
I actually find that statement to be pretty accurate. The current situation may seem intolerable to some but we’re nowhere near losing. We also haven’t acted with the military and political firmness needed to ensure victory.
President Bush acknowledged for the first time yesterday that the United States is not winning the war in Iraq and said he plans to expand the overall size of the “stressed” U.S. armed forces to meet the challenges of a long-term global struggle against terrorists.
As he searches for a new strategy for Iraq, Bush has now adopted the formula advanced by his top military adviser to describe the situation. “We’re not winning, we’re not losing,” Bush said in an interview with The Washington Post. The assessment was a striking reversal for a president who, days before the November elections, declared, “Absolutely, we’re winning.”
In another turnaround, Bush said he has ordered Defense Secretary Robert M. Gates to develop a plan to increase the troop strength of the Army and Marine Corps, heeding warnings from the Pentagon and Capitol Hill that multiple deployments in Iraq and Afghanistan are stretching the armed forces toward the breaking point.
This decision is five years overdue. I’ve never understood the reluctance to do this as we embark on “The Long War“. The full transcript of the Washington Post’s interview with the President can be found here.
Is it just me or is Al-Qaeda propaganda getting worse with every release? That trend started years ago but continues. The confident destroyers of the West have turned into whiners:
In the video, al-Zawahiri said: “Any road other than jihad will only lead to loss.”
He also said: “Those trying to liberate the land of Islam through elections based on secular constitutions or on decisions to surrender Palestine to the Jews will not liberate a grain of sand of Palestine.”
It was not clear when the videotape was recorded but its release comes as tensions are rising in the Palestinian territories after small-scale clashes and a call by Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, for early elections.
Walid Batrawi, an Al Jazeera correspondent in Ramallah, said: “It’s very hard to predict the effects of the message. It comes at a very sensitive time.”
Al-Zawahiri said: “Accepting the legitimacy of Mahmoud Abbas, the head of the national authority, America’s man in Palestine, and mandating the PLO which recognises Israel to negotiate with Israel is an abyss which will ultimately lead to eliminating the jihad and recognising Israel.”
There’s nothing new here. They don’t like democracy or the West. Perpetual war is the only way. I expect that even the Palestinians will shrug this one off.
This is their version of the story:
“‘Of all people, the Jews should know about ganging up, finding common enemies and telling the big lie,’” Ms. Regan said, according to a transcript of Mr. Jackson’s notes provided by Gary Ginsberg, an executive vice president of the News Corporation.
According to the transcript, Ms. Regan went on to say that the literary agent Esther Newberg; HarperCollins’s executive editor, David Hirshey; HarperCollins’s president, Jane Friedman, and Mr. Jackson “constitute a Jewish cabal against her.”
A lawyer for Ms. Regan, Bert Fields, denied that Ms. Regan had said there was a “Jewish cabal against her,” saying she used only the word “cabal” in the conversation, and it came in response to a question from Mr. Jackson. But he acknowledged that she had made some version of the first statement, drawing attention to the fact that her boss and others involved in the controversy over the aborted O.J. Simpson project were Jewish.
He denied, though, that this reflected any anti-Semitism. “There is nothing insulting to Jewish people in saying that Jews should particularly understand what it is to be victims of the big lie,” Mr. Fields said. “They were looking for an excuse to fire her, and they fired her and called it anti-Semitic. It ain’t anti-Semitic.”
I think her remarks (it’s hard to determine intent) were inappropriate but the anti-Semitic label might be taking it a bit far. But still, why did she even raise the issue?