fbpx

GET HOME DELIVERY! CLICK HERE »

ADVERTISE
pick up locations
HOME DELIVERY
donate

Jewish Journal

Connect. Inform. Inspire.

January 19, 2012

Settlers, officers hurt in outpost demolition

Leave a Comment / Israel, News /

Six West Bank settlers and three police officers were hurt during the demolition of an illegal outpost near Jericho.

Settlers threw rocks at police early Thursday morning when they gathered at an outpost near Mitzpeh Jericho to raze six dwellings. Police responded with tear gas, Haaretz reported. Hundreds of security forces reportedly gathered at the outpost, as well as 200 outpost supporters.

The police and three settlers were injured when the roof of one of the buildings collapsed as a protester was being removed.

At least three settlers were arrested on suspicion of assaulting police officers.

A dwelling in a second outpost was removed earlier on Thursday morning, according to reports.

Settlers, officers hurt in outpost demolition Read More »

Obama’s Iran choice

Leave a Comment / News, Opinion /

An article in Tuesday’s New York Times suggests that there is a method to the madness of the Republican presidential candidates’ hawkish rhetoric on Iran. I had thought that the reason all the Republican candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul) are such noisy warmongers is because that is their natural proclivity — and because it pleases donors (like Sheldon Adelson, Newt Gingrich’s big campaign funder) who base their political choices on Binyamin Netanyahu’s desires.

But Times reporter Mark Landler suggests that one of the results of this year’s conveniently timed Iran crisis is to present President Barack Obama with a choice of two options, either of which the GOP could successfully exploit to defeat him in the election.

As Landler points out:

In late June, when the campaign is in full swing, Mr. Obama will have to decide whether to take action against countries, including some staunch allies, if they continue to buy Iranian oil through its central bank.

After fierce lobbying by the White House, which opposed this hardening in the sanctions that have been its main tool in pressuring Tehran, Congress agreed to modify the legislation to give Mr. Obama leeway to delay action if he concludes the clampdown would disrupt the oil market. He may also invoke a waiver to exempt any country from sanctions based on national security considerations.

Under normal circumstances, a president’s decision to invoke a national security waiver on any foreign policy matter is hard to challenge. In this case, the president’s concern that imposing new sanctions would cause oil prices to soar (and disrupt economic recovery) would be good reason to pass on the latest congressional sanctions law.

But the political consequences of waiving could be dire.

Remember, the sanctions law in question is a creation of AIPAC and has been at the top of its agenda during this entire Congress. If Obama waives it, Netanyahu would use the media to make sure that his displeasure was known. The lobby, the Republican presidential candidate and even many of AIPAC’s Democratic cutouts on Capitol Hill would all scream bloody murder.

Sen. Mark Kirk (R-IL), perhaps the member of Congress closest to AIPAC, told the Times that he would not look kindly on a waiver and neither would the lobby.

“The first waiver would trigger a whole lot of other waiver applications, potentially gutting the policy. … The pro-Israel community would not want a gutting of the sanctions,” he said.

But what if Obama just takes the path of least political resistance and imposes the sanctions as AIPAC wants?

Then, oil prices rise.

According to the Times, “Already, Iran’s leaders are maneuvering to drive up oil prices, whether to signal that sanctions could bring repercussions, or to mitigate the effects of reduced sales. Iran’s threat to shut off the Strait of Hormuz, through which a fifth of the world’s oil passes, sent prices soaring this month.”

The article also quoted Stuart Eizenstat, a former top official at the Treasury and State Department who helped devise our Iran policy during the Clinton administration. According to Eizenstat, “sanctions could harm the economy and his [Obama’s] re-election chances.”

In other words, Obama will likely be harmed politically no matter which way he goes on sanctions.

Of course, the sanctions issue is just a subset of the larger “war or no war” question. The same political forces that support “crippling” sanctions (which may cripple us, our allies and ordinary Iranian citizens more than the Iranian regime) also favor keeping the war option “on the table” in case our efforts to thwart Iran’s nuclear program fail.

As is the case with sanctions, there are two options. One is to go to war, a policy that would tear the country (and especially the Democratic Party) apart in an election year. The other is to try to negotiate an end to Iran’s nuclear program but, if that fails, simply accept an Iran with a nuclear capability and “contain” it. That is what we have done with North Korea and Pakistan and did for many decades with the Soviet Union. That course would infuriate the lobby.

Another political lose-lose.

Fortunately, there is a third course, which applies to both the sanctions and the war questions: we can negotiate.

Writing in The Atlantic, Robert Wright, a foreign policy expert, suggests a way out of the current deadlock is to establish a nuclear-free Middle East:

The idea is that Israel and Iran would open themselves up to highly intrusive inspections—of their declared nuclear facilities and of any suspicious undeclared sites—and other nations in the region would agree to monitoring as well. As Israel became assured that there were no nuclear weapons programs afoot in the region, it would gradually reduce its nuclear stockpile until, years or even decades from now, it had no nuclear weapons—but could live secure in the knowledge that none of its adversaries had them either. (Israel might preserve “breakout capacity”—the ability to produce a nuke in a matter of months.)

Wright goes on to say that the main objection to this plan is the belief that Israel would never accept it. But according to a poll conducted by Israel’s Dahaf Institute (an equivalent of the Gallup organization) and cited in a New York Times piece by Steven Kull and Shibley Telhami, that is simply not true.

[W]hen asked whether it would be better for both Israel and Iran to have the bomb, or for neither to have it, 65 percent of Israeli Jews said neither. And a remarkable 64 percent favored the idea of a nuclear-free zone, even when it was explained that this would mean Israel giving up its nuclear weapons.” A clear majority also bought into the idea of opening Israel’s and Iran’s nuclear facilities to “a system of full international inspections.”

The same poll finds that only 43 percent of Jewish Israelis support a military strike on Iran, although 90 percent assume Iran will eventually develop the bomb.

The nuclear-free option is worth pursuing, as is every possible alternative to war. President Obama should start the process by reaching out to Iran quietly, with the single goal of avoiding war, reducing tensions, and ending the threats and counter-threats. It is possible he is already doing that, although the White House (with an eye or two on AIPAC) is denying it.

One last point: Why is it relatively uncontroversial to negotiate with the Taliban — who harbored the terrorists who killed 3000 Americans on September 11, 2001, and who have terrorized millions of Afghans for decades — but the idea of talking to Iran is considered beyond the pale?

The answer should be obvious. AIPAC and its congressional cutouts go wild at the thought of negotiating with Iran (or Hamas, for that matter) but are relatively indifferent to the Taliban who, of course, is far from Israel.

So we can talk to the thugs of the Taliban to bring about some sort of settlement. But we can’t even consider talking to the government of Iran.

What a shameful way to conduct foreign policy.

Obama’s Iran choice Read More »

Why Gingrich’s views on federal judiciary are so terrifying

Leave a Comment / Uncategorized /

With ” title=”endorsing Newt Gingrich” target=”_blank”>endorsing Newt Gingrich, now is probably a good time to discuss why Newt terrifies me.

All other political issues aside, Gingrich’s understanding of the judiciary’s role in the U.S. democracy is appalling. You don’t need to take Professor Varat’s federal courts class to know that there’s a problem with the president telling the Supreme Court justices to suck it when he doesn’t like one of their rulings.

But this basically is what Gingrich has said he will do starting on Day 1. Here is what he said Monday, via ” title=”far from the first time” target=”_blank”>far from the first time that Gingrich has demonstrated such contempt for the federal judiciary. Gingrich has ” title=”criticism for these views” target=”_blank”>criticism for these views. Michael Mukasey, who left the federal bench to serve as attorney general for George W. Bush, called Gingrich’s views ” title=”banana republic” target=”_blank”>banana republic.”

This issue is ripe with religion implications, and I’d like to add my two cents.

First, Gingrich’s understanding of whom gets to interpret the statutes and Constitution of the United States is fundamentally flawed. That is “ Why Gingrich’s views on federal judiciary are so terrifying Read More »

Fred Weintraub: The Serendipitous Producer

Leave a Comment / Books, Culture, Is Featured?, Judaism, Mobile Sections, News /

Fred Weintraub is not merely an eyewitness to the history of American pop culture.  As we discover in his wholly winning memoir, “Bruce Lee, Woodstock and Me: From the Man Behind a Half-Century of Music, Movies and Martial Arts” (Brooktree Canyon Press: $28.95), he was a featured player.

Weintraub’s considerable reputation in show business is based on his work as a club owner, talent manager, and producer, although he started out selling toys and baby strollers in the family business, later served as a “whorehouse piano player” and once entertained the notion of becoming a rabbi.  But the title he savors is “showman” — “I don’t crave the limelight, but love to put on shows with those that do.”  Over a long career that began when he opened a nightclub in Havana in the 1950s, his roster of celebrities has ranged from Woody Allen and Bill Cosby to Frankie Valli and Neil Diamond to Jane Fonda, Dustin Hoffman and Jackie Chan and countless other famous names.

He has earned the right to drop those names, and he is not shy about doing so.  But Weintraub’s book, co-written with David Fields, is at its best when he reveals what he knows about how the entertainment industry really works. “I’ve pretty much seen and done it all,” he writes, and it is not a hollow boast. “Or at least as much as any nice, Jewish, Ritalin-deprived, Depression baby could ever hope to see and do.”

Thus, for example, he points out that the title of “producer” is essentially meaningless nowadays, a term that is bestowed on “pool boys, psychics and next wives.”  But a real producer, according to Weintraub, is “a juggler, magician, and puppeteer all rolled into one — keeping twenty balls in the air,” he writes, “and making miracles happen every day.”  And he explains what he means by revealing what went on behind the scenes on the set of some very famous and successful movies ranging from “Enter the Dragon” to “Woodstock.”

“[R]emember Woody Allen at the beginning?” Weintraub pleaded in an effort to sell Warner Bros. on a project that one executive dismissed as “a documentary about water-logged hippies,” that is, the now-classic “Woodstock.” “A disaster. But I saw something in him. Didn’t my hunch pay off?” Characteristically, Weintraub credits himself with more than a gift for capturing a crucial and memorable moment in pop history.  “I was a bigger hero than Neil Armstrong,” he writes of his coup. “All he did was walk on the moon. I saved Warner Bros.”

Weintraub, in fact, was often at the right time and place, and he acknowledges the role of serendipity in his successful career.  When he opened The Bitter End in Greenwich Village, for instance, Weintraub and his partner were reduced to scraping the walls to prepare them for a fresh coat of paint.  When they accidentally uncovered the 150-year-old brick wall beneath the plaster, a cultural icon was created. 

“Pete Seeger, Randy Newman, Bill Cosby, Arlo Guthrie and more than thirty other music and comedy albums would be recorded live in front of that wall over the years,” he recalls. “And the image of one microphone in front of a red brick wall would become synonymous with stand-up comedy.”

I would readily compare “Bruce Lee, Woodstock and Me” with William Goldman’s “Adventures in the Screen Trade” as a superb example of the how-I-did-it Hollywood memoir, which may be the highest praise I can bestow upon the book. I doubt that any showman coming along today can aspire to a career as diverse, rollicking and accomplished as Weintraub’s has been, but “Bruce Lee, Woodstock and Me” will excite the imaginations and stoke the ambitions of its readers.

By the way, I briefly talked with Weintraub about his book shortly before it was published, and he rewarded me with a mention in the list of “advisors” that appears in the acknowledgments.  But the credit for his smart, funny and illuminating memoir — just like the credit for his remarkable career — belongs to him alone.

Fred Weintraub will give a talk and sign copies of “Bruce Lee, Woodstock and Me” at Book Soup, 8818 Sunset Blvd., West Hollywood, on Tuesday, Jan. 24,, at 7p.m.

Jonathan Kirsch, author and publishing attorney, is the book editor of The Jewish Journal. He blogs at www.jewishjournal.com and can be reached at books@jewishjournal.com.

Fred Weintraub: The Serendipitous Producer Read More »

The One Million Jews Mistake?

Leave a Comment / Uncategorized /

Two new independent studies have found that there are between 6.4 million and 6.6 million Jews living in the United States today, representing about 1.8% of the population. One study out of Brandeis by Leonard Saxe, the 6.4 million figure and another study out of the University of Miami and University of Conneticut by Ira Sheskin and Arnold Dashevsky are creating a debate which is the newest tempest in a teapot. With all the pronouncements about the newly found million Jews, we don’t know anything more about one single Jew in the US than we did before this “PEGGING” of US Jews at the over 6.4 million mark rather than the previous 5.2 million which would have made Israel at 5.8 million Jews the largest Jewish population in the world.

It all hinges on how hundreds of thousands of US respondents answered the generic religion survey question on dozens of general surveys in the US and whether Jewish screening questions were properly applied in more specialized Jewish population studies.  In both cases, as an experienced demographer, I would worry before I made a rash announcement of an million extra Jews in the U.S.  There are other serious issues as to estimation assumptions, such as using 3 to 10 year old surveys which provide no household members information to estimate current Jewish population figures based on current population estimates.

Its a reach to use the methodologies that Saxe, in the Brandeis study, and the Sheskin and Dashevsky study use to estimate U.S. National Jewish populations.  If my experience with false positives, that is non-Jews claiming to be Jewish, in local Jewish surveys in Los Angeles, San Francisco, Seattle and Houston is ramped up to a national scale and ignored then I would expect a number much higher than it actually is.

As described in a recent Forward article:

Daunted by the steep expense and lengthy time required by random digit dialing, Saxe and his team ferreted out data that already existed to reach his conclusion. This included information from more than 150 government surveys on topics completely unrelated to Judaism, such as health care or education. Each study had a sample size of at least 1,000 people, and each study asked the question: What is your religion?

So, as long as US Jews don’t actually do a needed $10-14 million scientific survey, we retain bragging rights over Israel on the basis of guesstimates.

Now that we’ve cheaply built this Jewish demographic castle in the air…when do we move in?

Pini Herman, PhD. has served as Asst. Research Professor at the University of Southern California Dept. of Geography,  Adjunct Lecturer at the USC School of Social Work,  Research Director at the Jewish Federation of Greater Los Angeles following Bruce Phillips, PhD. in that position (I was recently notified that with 40,000 visitors this year the 15 year old study of the LA Jewish population was third most downloaded study from Berman Jewish Policy Archives in 2011) and is immediate past President of the Movable Minyan a lay-lead independent congregation in the 3rd Street area. Currently he is a principal of Phillips and Herman Demographic Research. To email Pini: pini00003@gmail.com To follow Pini on Twitter:

The One Million Jews Mistake? Read More »

David Mamet’s Interview in Ha’aretz

Leave a Comment / Blogs, Entertainment, Hollywood, Is Featured?, Mobile Sections, News /

After my last two posts on Howard Gordon—one praising him for the seeming moral clarity of his shows about terrorism and the other criticizing him for omitting Israel in his Golden Globe acceptance speech—someone said to me: “Orit, you might like David Mamet better.”

David Mamet is probably the most unabashed, unapologetic Israel lover and defender in Hollywood, as famous for his political about-face towards conservatism as he is for his beloved plays and movies. I doubt he’d ever hesitate to mention the “I” word at a Hollywood awards ceremony when warranted.

Here’s the start of Aluf Benn’s recent, David Mamet’s Interview in Ha’aretz Read More »

Jewish Culture for the non-Jews.

Leave a Comment / Judaism, News, Torah /

2 big green eyes welcomed me in the most magical city of Cracow, Poland.
They belonged to a blond angelic girl name Sabina. Sabina is suffering from a rare syndrome of great hunger for knowledge, and this drives her in her continuous pursuit for spiritual challenges.
Once revealing Judaism is the origin of her belief in Jesus, she decided to know anything about the Torah of the Jews. She takes classes, she volunteers at the Jewish Community Center and she dreams of Israel. (I’m just ashamed I know nothing about Jesus, though I can’t regret my obligatory biblical high-school education.) Sometimes people ask her ‘what’s the deal’? Is she up for conversion, did she fall in love with a boy? Questions that reminded me narrow approaches from back home:
I like long skirts, but I couldn’t go with them in certain circles in Tel-Aviv without people assuming I’m religious. I’m not allowed to use an expression such as “Be’ezrat Ha-shem” (with God’s will) or “Baruch Ha-shem”(God Bless), which I consider to be taken from daily Hebrew, rather than to represent a cult, because my friends would get alert. Moreover, I get alert by the fact I was just perceived as religious. Why?
When I step confidentially into the Yoga studio down town do I think of conversion to Hinduism? Can’t a Jewish Israeli enjoy Jewish culture without observing “Shabat”? What about the non-Jews? Must I become a Viking In order to enjoy a good troll-story?

The Jewish community of Cracow offers the Poles a taste of Jewish culture, which is apparently recognized by the locals as a need- first time for me to face such embracement. 
I shouldn’t have been surprised; JCC’s director, Jonathan Orenstein believes- “We should teach more about Jewish life in the place dedicated to the immortalization of Jewish death”.
He should know. Thousands of Israeli youth meet Jonathan every winter on their way to experience history as vivid as their educational program can target itself to. For me, it’s pure crime; Israel don’t put as much as resources on introduction of Judaism in the Diaspora as much as it puts it in Shoa horror stories.( It is not so Zionistic.) Tremendous effort is given to the justification of giving those 18 years old a year later- a gun. Why else would they cherish Nazis culture?  The camps were not created by Jews. Jews created adorable inspiring cafés, some of which still play good old Klezmer music in the remarkable attractive Jewish quarter.
The Jewish community in Cracow taught me utopian reality in which Jewish culture is treated rightly by Jews, non-Jews, religious and seculars.
If it was up to me, I’ll vote for erasing the monuments of terror, in favor of more Jewish theater and restaurants.

Jewish Culture for the non-Jews. Read More »

Iran warns region against ‘dangerous’ stance on Hormuz

Leave a Comment / News, Worldwide /

Iran’s foreign minister warned Arab neighbors on Thursday not to put themselves in a “dangerous position” by aligning themselves too closely with the United States in the escalating dispute over Tehran’s nuclear activity.

Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz, used for a third of the world’s seaborne oil trade, if pending Western moves to ban Iranian crude exports cripple its lifeblood energy sector, fanning fears of a slide into wider Middle East war.

European Union foreign ministers are expected at a meeting on Monday to agree an oil embargo against Iran and a freeze on the assets of its central bank, French Foreign Minister Alain Juppe said, confirming diplomatic leaks.

Saudi Arabia, the world’s No. 1 oil exporter, riled Iran earlier this week when it said it could swiftly raise oil output for key customers if needed, a scenario that could transpire if Iranian exports were embargoed.

“We want peace and tranquility in the region. But some of the countries in our region, they want to direct other countries 12,000 miles away from this region,” Iranian Foreign Minister Ali Akbar Salehi said in English during a visit to Turkey.

The remark was an apparent reference to the alliance of Iran’s Arab neighbors with Washington, which maintains a big naval force in the Gulf and says it will keep the waterway open.

“I am calling to all countries in the region, please don’t let yourselves be dragged into a dangerous position,” Salehi told Turkey’s NTV broadcaster.

He added the United States should make clear that it was open for negotiations with Tehran without conditions. He referred to a letter Iran says it received from U.S. President Barack Obama about the situation in the Straight of Hormuz, the contents of which have not been made public.

“Mr Obama sent a letter to Iranian officials, but America has to make clear that it has good intentions and should express that it’s ready for talks without conditions,” he said.

“Out in the open they show their muscles but behind the curtains they plead to us to sit down and talk. America has to pursue a safe and honest strategy so we can get the notion that America this time is serious and ready.”

The United States, like other Western countries, says it is prepared to talk to Iran but only if Tehran agrees to discuss halting its enrichment of uranium. Western officials say Iran has been asking for talks “without conditions” as a stalling tactic while refusing to put its nuclear program on the table.

IAEA CHIEF SAYS MUST ALERT WORLD ABOUT IRAN

The International Atomic Energy Agency chief said it was his duty to alert the world about possible military aspects to Iran’s nuclear campaign, keeping the heat on Tehran ahead of a rare visit by senior IAEA officials for talks on January 29-31.

“What we know suggests the development of nuclear weapons,” he was quoted as saying in comments published in the Financial Times Deutschland on Thursday. “We want to check over everything that could have a military dimension.”

An IAEA delegation, to be headed by Deputy Director General Herman Nackaerts, is expected to seek explanations for intelligence information indicating Iran has engaged in research and development applicable to nuclear weapons.

Tehran denies wanting bombs, saying it is refining uranium only for electricity generation and medical applications.

Salehi said on Wednesday that Iran, the world’s fifth biggest oil exporter, was in touch with world powers to reopen talks that he expected to be held soon.

Washington and the EU quickly denied this, saying they are still waiting for Iran to show it wanted serious negotiations addressing fears that it trying to master ways to build atom bombs behind the facade of a civilian nuclear energy program.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu said after meeting Salehi that all sides were willing to resume talks but the time and place need to be settled. “I will tell Ms. Ashton about the talks today,” he told reporters, referring to the EU foreign policy chief who represents the powers on Iran.

“We have always said we are ready for dialogue,” France’s Juppe told reporters in Paris. “Ashton has made concrete offers, but sadly until today Iran has not committed transparently or cooperatively to this discussion process.”

He added: “It’s for this reason that to avoid an irreparable military option we have to strengthen sanctions.”

Iran has wanted to discuss only broader international security issues, not its nuclear program, in meetings with the powers held sporadically over the past five years.

“RED LINE”

Iranian politicians said Obama had expressed readiness to negotiate in a letter to Iran’s clerical supreme leader, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei.

“In this letter it was said that closing the Strait of Hormuz is our (U.S.) ‘red line’ and also asked for direct negotiations,” the semi-official Fars news agency quoted lawmaker Ali Mottahari as saying.

Washington declined to comment on whether Obama had written to Khamenei.

The stage was set for international oil sanctions against Iran when Obama signed legislation on December 31 that would freeze out any institution dealing with Iran’s central bank, making it impossible for most countries to buy Iranian crude.

Diplomats said the EU’s 27 member states were still mulling details such as when an embargo would start. They were looking into a grace period that would end in July to help some debt-ridden EU states that rely on Iranian oil to adjust to a ban.

“On the central bank, things have been moving in the right direction…,” an EU diplomat said. “There is now wide agreement on the principle. Discussions continue on the details.”

CHINA DEFENDS OIL TRADE WITH IRAN

Chinese Premier Wen Jiabao defended his country’s extensive oil trade with Iran against Western sanctions pressure in comments published on Thursday. Nevertheless, he said, Beijing firmly opposes any Iranian effort to acquire nuclear weapons.

The last talks between Iran and the permanent members of the U.N. Security Council – the United States, Britain, France, Russia and China – along with Germany stalled in Istanbul a year ago, with the parties unable to agree even on an agenda.

The six have also failed to agree on a common line in their approach to Iran, a lack of unity that led to a watering down of four earlier rounds of U.N. sanctions adopted since 2006.

An IAEA report in November lent weight to concerns that Iran has worked on designing a nuclear weapon, and Tehran is shifting enrichment to an underground bunker in a mountain fortified against air attack.

Israel, which is believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal but sees Iran’s nuclear ambitions as a mortal threat, and the United States have not ruled out military action as a last resort to prevent an atomic “breakout” by Tehran.

However, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak said on Wednesday that any decision about an Israeli assault on Iran was “very far off.”

Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov said the last-ditch military option mooted by U.S. and Israeli leaders would ignite a disastrous, widespread Middle East war. Russia also opposes the new push for oil sanctions, calling it counterproductive.

Additional reporting by Ramin Mostafavi in Tehran, Chris Buckley in Beijing, Phil Stewart in Washington, Alexei Anishchuk in Moscow, Justyna Pawlak in Brussels, Allyn Fisher-Ilan in Jerusalem and Fredrik Dahl in Vienna; Writing by Mark Heinrich; Editing by Peter Graff

Iran warns region against ‘dangerous’ stance on Hormuz Read More »

Gross visited Cuba at least five times, court document says

Leave a Comment / News, Worldwide /

Jailed American Jewish contractor Alan Gross visited Cuba at least five times in one year to set up wireless Internet connections, according to a report citing leaked court documents.

The report Thursday by The Associated Press comes two days after Juan Lamigueiro of the Cuban interests section in Washington posted a letter on the Cuban Foreign Ministry website saying that “the Cuban government has engaged the U.S. government on its willingness to find a humanitarian solution to the case of Mr. Alan Gross on a reciprocal humanitarian basis.” The statement is believed to be referring to the so-called “Cuban Five,” spies arrested in the United States in 1998, which Cuba has been rumored to have asked the U.S. to swap in exchange for Gross.

Gross visited Cuba five times in 2009, the year he was arrested, and his movements there had been tracked since 2004, according to a filing with the court, apparently from Gross’ sentencing, the AP reported. The document was published on the U.S.-based blog Cafe Fuerte, and its authenticity has been neither confirmed nor denied.

The document alleges that Gross recruited other Americans to help bring restricted telecommunications equipment into Cuba.

Gross is serving a 15-year prison sentence in Cuba. He has been jailed since he was arrested in 2009 as he was leaving Cuba.

Gross’ family and U.S. State Department officials say that Gross was in the country on a U.S. Agency for International Development contract to help the country’s 1,500 Jews communicate with other Jewish communities using the Internet. The main Jewish groups in Cuba have denied any contact with or knowledge of Gross or the program.

He reportedly is in poor health and has lost more than 100 pounds.

Gross was not included on a list released last month of nearly 3,000 prisoners whom Cuban leader Raoul Castro said he would release on humanitarian grounds.

Gross visited Cuba at least five times, court document says Read More »

Perry set to drop out of presidential race

Leave a Comment / Is Featured?, News, Politics, United States /

Rick Perry reportedly is dropping his bid to become the Republican presidential nominee.

CNN and The New York Times reported Thursday that the Texas governor will announce later in the day his decision to bow out; a news conference reportedly is scheduled in South Carolina.

Perry, a staunch backer of Israel who has longstanding ties with leading Republican Jews, surged in the polls when he announced his bid for the GOP nod last August, but he dipped following a number of poor debate performances.

After lagging in the Iowa and New Hampshire tests, he had hoped to rally in South Carolina, which goes to the polls on Saturday. The polls, however, show Perry trailing in the conservative state.

Perry’s exit would narrow the race to four candidates—front-runner Mitt Romney, Rick Santorum, Newt Gingrich and Ron Paul. Reuters reported that two Perry campaign sources said he is likely to endorse Gingrich, the former speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives.

Gingrich, an ex-congressman from Georgia, and Santorum, a former U.S. senator from Pennsylvania, are expected to battle for Perry’s evangelical and social conservative backers.

Romney, the former Massachusetts governor who tied with Santorum in Iowa and won in New Hampshire, is currently leading in South Carolina polling.

Perry set to drop out of presidential race Read More »