The May 21 Lincoln Journal Star piece on the Rosenbergs' son's address to the American Civil Liberties Union annual dinner glosses over the most important fact of the case.
Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were unquestionably spies; the Venona intercepts, Khrushchev's statement that the pair provided "very significant help in accelerating the production of our atomic bomb," and released KGB documents show that Julius was in fact a leading Soviet spy in America who led an espionage ring that transferred nuclear weapons technology to the Soviets.
In this way the Rosenbergs put in jeopardy the lives of every man, woman and child in this country and sustained an evil empire that kept hundreds of millions of people in bondage.
Nonetheless, the ACLU persists in trying to maintain the long-discredited lie that these treasonous agents of a tyrannical foreign power were somehow innocent victims of anti-Communist hysteria.
Why this 50-year love affair with virulent enemies of the United States? Has the ACLU run out of innocent people to defend?
Of course, it's easy to post snide insinuations on FR about atheists, with a cohort of fundy brethren around to provide cover. It's not so easy to confront liberals on their own turf. The Rosenbergs were real Marxists, and real enemies of the United States. Dawkins is a Lib Dem who happens not to like the President. To some of us, that's a meaningful distinction.
Since jwalsh07 has seen fit to impugn the conservative credentials of evos in general, I though I'd post this link , from today's Lincoln Journal-Star. First letter on the page.
A false assertion not backed by any evidence. In fact, I have pointed out that certain "evos" are great contributors whose opinions I hold in high esteem on conservative issues. You, at times, have been among them.
I assume you wrote that letter to the editor and you have my thanks for doing it. Well done prof. I'll ping you next time one of my letters makes it through the liberal filter of my local newspaper. To be fair though, they have printed a number of my rants.
Of course, it's easy to post snide insinuations on FR about atheists, with a cohort of fundy brethren around to provide cover.
Another unfounded assertion 180 out from the facts. I debated this issue on this thread by myself. The "brethren" were all on your side. Not complaining, just stating a fact. I expect nothing less when I visit your 'turf'.
It's not so easy to confront liberals on their own turf.LOL, I rode around Boston in particular and New England in general with "Impeach the President and her husband" bumper stickers on my cars for near 6 years. I've gone nose to nose with union thugs trying to suppress conservatives rights to speech at various rallies here in Ct. I've posted some of those very pictures here at FR. Confrontation happens. Such is life.
The Rosenbergs were real Marxists, and real enemies of the United States. Dawkins is a Lib Dem who happens not to like the President. To some of us, that's a meaningful distinction.
Yes the Rosenbergs were Marxists. Dawkins writings regarding religion, and I have read quite a bit of them, force me to conclude that his views on religion are the same as Marx. How you conclude from that that that I think all atheists are marxist in their views toward religion I have no idea.
But here's something you can take to the bank Prof. My personal rule on FR is that I don't write anything that I wouldn't say to you in person.
Regards.
It is, of course, people like jwalsh, who conflate religious unorthodoxy with marxism and treason, are the very ones that cause ACLU types to conflate conservatism with the inquisition.
I think it is my duty as a human being to be equally unwelcome in both camps.
I do know something about the people who defend the rosenbergs, having lived next door to Robert Meeropol in college.