Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Yes, They Were Guilty. But of What Exactly? [NYT FINALLY admits Rosenbergs were guilty!]
NY Times ^ | June 15, 2003 | SAM ROBERTS

Posted on 06/15/2003 6:43:14 AM PDT by Pharmboy


Robert, left, and Michael Rosenberg in June 1953.

Fifty years ago Thursday, Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were executed in the electric chair at Sing Sing. Their execution, originally set for 11 p.m. on Friday, June 19, 1953, was rescheduled for 8 p.m. to avoid conflict with the Jewish sabbath.

"They were to be killed more quickly than planned," the playwright Arthur Miller wrote, "to avoid any shadow of bad taste."

A shadow lingers.

"I grew up believing Ethel and Julius were completely innocent," Robert Meeropol, who was 6 years old in 1953, says of the Rosenbergs, his parents. "By the time I completed law school in 1985, however, I realized that the evidence we had amassed did not actually prove my parents' innocence but rather only demonstrated that they had been framed."

After digesting newly released American decryptions of Soviet cables a decade later, Mr. Meeropol came to a revised conclusion. "While the transcriptions seemed inconclusive, they forced me to accept the possibility that my father had participated in an illegal and covert effort to help the Soviet Union defeat the Nazis," he writes in his new memoir, "An Execution in the Family: One Son's Journey" (St. Martin's Press).

Of course, the Rosenbergs weren't executed for helping the Soviets defeat the Nazis, but as atom spies for helping Stalin end America's brief nuclear monopoly. They weren't charged with treason (the Russians were technically an ally in the mid-1940's) or even with actual spying. Rather, they were accused of conspiracy to commit espionage — including enlisting Ethel's brother, David Greenglass, through his wife, Ruth, to steal atomic secrets from the Los Alamos weapons laboratory where he was stationed as an Army machinist during World War II. Mr. Greenglass's chief contribution was to corroborate what the Soviets had already gleaned from other spies, which by 1949 enabled them to replicate the bomb dropped on Nagasaki. (He confessed, testified against his sister and brother-in-law and was imprisoned for 10 years; Ruth testified, too, and was spared prosecution.)

As leverage against Julius, Ethel was also indicted on what, in retrospect, appears to have been flimsy evidence. The government didn't have to prove that anything of value was delivered to the Soviets, only that the participants acted to advance their goal.

"When you're dealing with a conspiracy, you don't have to be the kingpin, you have to participate," says James Kilsheimer, who helped prosecute the Rosenbergs. "You can't be partially guilty any more than you can be partially pregnant."

But to justify the death penalty, which was invoked to press the Rosenbergs to confess and implicate others, the government left the impression that the couple had handed America's mightiest weapon to the Soviets and precipitated the Korean War.

Records of the grand jury that voted the indictment remain sealed. But we now know the Soviet cables decoded before the trial provided no hard evidence of Ethel's complicity. And Mr. Greenglass has recently admitted that he lied about the most incriminating evidence against his sister. The government's strategy backfired. Ethel wouldn't budge. The Rosenbergs refused to confess and were convicted.

"She called our bluff," William P. Rogers, the deputy attorney general at the time, said shortly before he died in 2001.

"They had the key to the death chamber in their hands," Mr. Kilsheimer says. "They never used it."

Whatever military and technical secrets Julius delivered to the Russians — and it now seems all but certain that, as a committed Communist, he did provide information — the Rosenbergs proved more valuable as martyrs than as spies.

"The Soviets did win the propaganda war," said Robert J. Lamphere, an agent for the Federal Bureau of Investigation.

The war isn't over. David Greenglass is 81; Ruth Greenglass is 79. They live under a pseudonym because their surname has become synonymous with betrayal of kin and country. "Perhaps," Mr. Meeropol says, "this is David and Ruth's final punishment."

On Thursday, Mr. Meeropol, who is 56, and his brother Michael, who is 60, (they took their adoptive parents' name) will attend a program at City Center in Manhattan to "commemorate the Rosenbergs' resistance" and benefit the Rosenberg Fund for Children, which Robert runs.

Michael Meeropol is chairman of the economics department at Western New England College. Would any evidence ever convince him that his father was a spy? "If Soviet documents were verified as historically accurate, I'd certainly believe that," he replied.

Then what? How would he explain his father's behavior? "I would have to do some thinking about my parents being involved in dangerous things, but I can't judge people from the 1940's," he said. "He's not in the Army. He has bad eyesight. He can't make the contribution that others were making. I could argue that this was a way of doing it."

To this day, plenty of people would argue that he's wrong.

Sam Roberts, the deputy editor of the Week in Review, is the author of "The Brother: The Untold Story of the Rosenberg Case."


TOPICS: Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Extended News; Foreign Affairs; Government; Russia
KEYWORDS: coldwar; leftyapologists; nytimes; rosenbergs; spying
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-334 last
To: Doctor Stochastic
It's what he said ... I have no reason to make it up. Leo Szilard was the uncle of two boys I played with as a very little girl. He was sometimes there and I liked to listen to the grownups talk, when I was little. I have a far better than average memory and this is what I recall. Since Dr. Szilard is now dead, I can't get him to tell you this himself. :-)
321 posted on 06/18/2003 12:00:34 AM PDT by nopardons
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 316 | View Replies]

To: Doctor Stochastic
Scientists have complained about security measures.Many left Los Alamos or threatened to leave after the controversy over security and oversight broke.I went back and reviewed some articles from Wired News,the latest May 1.U of C wasn't doing its job.
322 posted on 06/18/2003 5:51:15 AM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 318 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
they were useful idiots

They seem to have been wrong about some things too. International control didn't develop in the way they thought or hoped. The competitive struggle for dominance continued - eventually resulting in the break-up of the Soviet Union.

I'd very much like to know the details of their thought on this. Russell in 1920 already wrote about the drive for power - that the Russian Marxists had erred in ignoring this. I'd guess they thought that atomic weapons would channel competitive energies into different, less destructive endeavors.

323 posted on 06/18/2003 6:10:43 AM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 315 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
Following your tip about Los Alamos, a search revealed shocking details of missing classified data and equipment. The University of California has a tawdry history of very serious security violations.

It is also interesting to note that this university first received these long term contracts on the merits of having the spy Oppenheimer as a faculty member.
324 posted on 06/18/2003 8:55:12 AM PDT by HISSKGB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 322 | View Replies]

To: HISSKGB
I love this thread.It makes me search and I've learned a lot.I don't know what the final decision is or will be about U of C and Los Alamos.It used to be automatic renewal.The link to Oppenheimer ties into the rest of the discussion.Over 50 years and still part of the ongoing story.Did you read the story in Wired News about the author's ease getting into Los Alamos!
325 posted on 06/18/2003 9:15:25 AM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 324 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
I saw that! It's hard to believe the University of California is so sloppy and errant in its management of Los Alamos that reporters can wander through areas of highest security without any given permission.

What astounded me even more was that Wen Ho Lee had been caught stealing secrets that benefited the Red Chinese three or four times over the years. This smells like another Rosenberg deal, including Lee's sympathetic treatment in the press. Time mag and the Washington Post are only two of the many that worked hard to whitewash Lee.

I am curious to learn if the branch of U of C that manages Los Alamos is at Berkeley, the left coast hot bed of communism.
326 posted on 06/18/2003 10:55:31 AM PDT by HISSKGB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 325 | View Replies]

To: HISSKGB
The reasonable (?) explaination I read about why Lee wasn't prosecuted was because to do so would require the govt. to reveal topsecret information and harm national security in a trial.After all the prosecutor must state what Lee is accused of revealing or stealing.
327 posted on 06/18/2003 11:01:09 AM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 326 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
I found the PBS 1999 "On Line News Hour" in which Walter Pincus of the Washington Post said, referring to the Lee case, security was so great that no one could do what Lee did in 1993 and 1997. I interpreted that to mean Pincus didn't think Lee did any thing bad in 1999.
328 posted on 06/18/2003 11:22:15 AM PDT by HISSKGB
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 327 | View Replies]

Read this thread later
329 posted on 06/18/2003 11:42:52 AM PDT by Pagey (Hillary Rotten is a Smug, Holier - Than - Thou Socialist)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: HISSKGB
I googled wen ho lee..plea bargain.Acronym.org/uk had a good article.
330 posted on 06/18/2003 12:28:26 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 328 | View Replies]

To: I_Love_My_Husband
Einstein to Roosevelt, August 2, 1939
Documents on the decision to use the atomic bomb
Leo Szilard Online

It's easy to let political differences and political partisanship obscure the true enormity of Szilard's accomplishments. He managed to convince the United States to invest an enormous amount of time and effort in developing an untried weapons technology - despite divided scientific opinion. He was that sure of his physics and that forceful in presenting it. That's what the first document is about.

The second details the development of the man's moral approach to atomic weapons.

The third is an overview of his life and achievements.

Sorry to be so slow but this research takes time - more time than a real-time conversation allows.

331 posted on 06/18/2003 3:23:00 PM PDT by liberallarry
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 249 | View Replies]

To: Chad Fairbanks
The beginning of the thread has a lot of info.
332 posted on 06/19/2003 5:27:52 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: liberallarry
Not to mention that Szilard and Einstein had about 45 joint patents for several types of refigerators. Einstein was always a tinkerer even from his Patent Office days.
333 posted on 06/19/2003 8:45:09 PM PDT by Doctor Stochastic (Vegetabilisch = chaotisch is der Charakter der Modernen. - Friedrich Schlegel)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 331 | View Replies]

To: MEG33
mark
334 posted on 06/20/2003 10:16:50 PM PDT by MEG33
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 333 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 261-280281-300301-320321-334 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson