September 13, 2008 So the "Red-baiters" and the "witch-hunters" were right, after all.
For more than half a century, it's been an article of faith among "progressives" that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were framed for their political beliefs and executed in 1953 as Soviet spies. But now the Rosenbergs' 91-year-old co-defendant, Morton Sobell, has confessed all to The New York Times. Yes, he and the Rosenbergs were devout communists, says Sobell. And yes, he and Julius Rosenberg did pass atomic secrets to Moscow. Of course, Sobell, who served 19 years, adds his own little twists to the story. He "never thought of it" as espionage, he says, because the secrets he stole were "strictly defensive" and "there's a big difference between giving that and stuff that could be used to attack our country." And he insists that Ethel Rosenberg, while aware of her husband's espionage, was guilty only "of being Julius's wife." But, even if Sobell's contentions were all true, he and his co- defendants were legally culpable of the crime with which they were charged and convicted: conspiracy to commit espionage. So this much is now clear from Morton Sobell's belated confession: The verdict of history agrees completely with that of the court. Guilty, guilty, guilty. On Sep 13, 5:18 am, Frank <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Declassified grand jury transcripts confirm frame-up of Ethel > Rosenberg > By Tom Eley > 13 September 2008 > > Use this version to print | Send this link by email | Email the author > > The recent release of previously secret grand jury transcripts has > revealed that crucial testimony was perjured in the conviction and > 1953 execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg for conspiracy to commit > espionage on behalf of the Soviet Union. > > The Rosenbergs were accused of planning to provide the Soviet Union > with intelligence that would assist in the development of its atomic > bomb project. They were tried and convicted in 1951, and executed in > 1953 at the height of the post-World War II Red Scare, orphaning two > young children. The execution was a savage act by the US government > calculated to terrorize the population. > > The transcripts, which had been sealed for 55 years, became available > through the National Archives and Records Administration after a > lawsuit by historians and an independent archive. A New York court > ordered that the testimony of all but four of 45 grand jury witnesses > be released. This included both the testimony of Ethel Rosenberg > herself and that of Ruth Greenglass, the wife of David Greenglass, > Ethel’s brother. > > It is the testimony of Ruth Greenglass that strongly suggests that at > least Ethel Rosenberg was convicted based on perjured testimony. > > During the Rosenberg trial, Ruth Greenglass claimed that Ethel > Rosenberg typed up secrets stolen by David Greenglass, who was a > machinist at Los Alamos in New Mexico, the center of the US atomic > bomb project. The Greenglasses claimed that Ethel then passed the > typed sheets via Julius Rosenberg to Soviet intelligence. The > assertion was instrumental in the conviction and execution of Ethel. > > The newly released grand jury testimony completely contradicts the > version of events Ruth Greenglass presented at the subsequent trial. > After stating to the grand jury that she had assisted Julius Rosenberg > with espionage, prosecutors asked Greenglass, “Didn’t you write [the > atomic bomb information] down on a piece of paper?” “Yes,” she > answered, “I wrote [the atomic bomb information] down on a piece of > paper and [Julius Rosenberg] took it with him.” > > This grand jury testimony confirmed the account given by former Soviet > intelligence officials, who said that the information they received > was written in longhand. > > According to the anticommunist historian Ronald Radosh, “The grand > jury documents cast significant doubt on the key prosecution charge > used to convict Ethel Rosenberg at the trial and sentence her to > death.” > > In 2001, David Greenglass, who spent 10 years in prison for espionage, > disavowed his own testimony. He said the government blackmailed him by > threatening to execute his wife. Ruth Greenglass was never tried, and > died this past April at the age of 84. > > Historical context > > There is little doubt that Julius Rosenberg conveyed intelligence to > the Soviet Union. It is likely that Ethel Rosenberg was aware of this, > but did not participate actively. Both were members of the Stalinist > Communist Party USA (CPUSA). > > The charges of atomic espionage against the Rosenbergs, however, were > sensationalized. There is no evidence to suggest that information > gathered by Rosenberg through Greenglass at Los Alamos played any role > in the successful completion of the Russian atomic bomb. According to > Morton Sobell, who was convicted along with the Rosenbergs and who > recently confessed to carrying on espionage for the Soviet Union, the > intelligence that Julius gathered “was junk.” Alexander Feklisov, the > Soviet agent who was Rosenberg’s contact, said that Julius “didn’t > understand anything about the atomic bomb and he couldn’t help us.” > > The Rosenbergs were victims of a sharp ideological shift on the part > of the US ruling elite that was initiated in the late 1940s. This turn > is associated with red-baiters such as Republican Senator Joseph > McCarthy, who carried out intensely publicized hearings about supposed > communist infiltration of the government in the early 1950s. It was > shaped as well, however, by the transformation of US liberalism, > acting through the Democratic Party. > > From 1935, when Joseph Stalin adopted the “Popular Front” in response > to the catastrophe of the Nazi seizure of power in Germany—a defeat > that had resulted from the Comintern’s own counterrevolutionary and > short-sighted calculations—the CPUSA supported the administration of > Franklin Delano Roosevelt and the Democratic Party. This uncritical > support became especially enthusiastic after Germany repudiated > Stalin’s disastrous Nazi-Soviet Pact and invaded the Soviet Union. > > Julius Rosenberg began providing information to the Soviets in this > WWII context, when the US and the Soviet Union were officially allied > in war against Nazi Germany. The US, beginning after the Nazi > invasion, extended significant material support to the Soviet Union > through the Lend Lease Act, which made available US tanks, planes and > munitions to the Soviet Union as it suffered the brunt of the > Wehrmacht’s military might. > > Even during the war, there were sharp divisions within the ruling > elite over policy toward the Soviet Union. A section favored extending > the Soviet Union little or no assistance in its life-and-death > struggle with Nazi Germany (Harry Truman, then a US senator, said in > 1941, “If we see that Germany is winning we ought to help Russia, and > if we see Russia is winning, we ought to help Germany, and that way > let them kill as many as possible.”) Another element favored opening > up a western front in Europe as soon as possible in order to join > forces with the Red Army in crushing Nazi Germany. > > The Roosevelt administration charted a middle course, providing the > Soviets with extensive material assistance, but rejecting Stalin’s > desperate pleas for the western front as long as possible, while > attempting to prevent the Soviets from gaining access to advanced > military technology—including the developing Manhattan project at Los > Alamos. Yet, given the context of the US-Soviet alliance, the small- > scale espionage attributed to Rosenberg, which primarily related to > radar technology, hardly constituted a major threat and may, in fact, > have been tolerated. > > In their military calculations the Roosevelt administration and the > dominant sections of the ruling elite were already looking forward to > the postwar period and an anticipated assertion of American hegemony, > in which the Soviet Union would be the central rival. > > Stalin did not see as far. The Moscow bureaucracy fervently hoped that > “peaceful coexistence” and cooperation would continue. The effort to > acquire atomic weapons was aimed primarily at providing bargaining > room with the US in such an environment. > > The Red Scare > > Because of this outlook, faithfully parroted by the American > Stalinists, the CPUSA had ill prepared its members and sympathizers > for the coming postwar reaction. > > The shift toward an anti-Soviet posture was anticipated by Truman’s > replacement of Henry Wallace in the number-two spot on the Democratic > Party ticket in 1944. Wallace, who had been become Roosevelt’s vice > president in 1941, favored a conciliatory approach toward the Soviet > Union. It was also announced by the atomic incineration of Hiroshima > and Nagasaki in early August of 1945, which Truman calculated would > place the Soviet Union in a weak position in ongoing negotiations > about the postwar order. > > US imperialism took shape as the most powerful counterrevolutionary > force in the world in the immediate aftermath of the world war, > emboldened by the demise of the old European colonial empires—British, > French, Dutch and Belgian—but challenged by third world liberation > movements that were invariably dubbed “communist.” > > By 1949, however, hopes for unrivaled hegemony took a series of blows. > That year, the US-backed nationalist regime in China fell before the > peasant armies of Mao Zedong, and the Soviet Union successfully > detonated an atomic bomb. A year later, North Korea invaded South > Korea. It was in this immediate context that the Truman administration > accelerated the Cold War—outlined in the infamous “NSC-68” document > and “Truman Doctrine” which pledged the US to the defense of “the free > world” against “communism”—and launched the Red Scare to suppress any > domestic opposition to this program of militarism. > > Indeed, the Red Scare was based at least as much on domestic > considerations as foreign policy ones. In 1945-46, the US experienced > its largest strike wave in the 20th century. Many of these were > wildcat strikes in opposition to the official union leaderships, which > hoped to carry on the labor-management cooperation that had prevailed > during the war. A deeply felt democratic and egalitarian spirit also > pervaded the ranks of the massive conscript army. There was a mood in > the working class that things could not be allowed to go back to what > they had been during the Great Depression. And there was a certain > radicalization among layers of intellectuals and in American culture > that had emerged in the Great Depression and threatened to resume at a > higher level in the war’s aftermath. > > The Red Scare was the ruling class’s antidote to all of these threats. > It was first and foremost used as a bludgeon against the working > class. Militant workers, who had played the vital role in building up > the industrial union movement in the 1930s, were purged from the CIO > and the AFL. The state terrorized artists and intellectuals through > dozens of inquisitional hearings organized by the House Un-American > Activities Committee, in which leading figures of US culture were > forced to recant their previous political affiliations and finger > their associates, or else face charges of ... > > read more » --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
