The upshot of "The Rosenberg Files" is that:
1) Based on the voluminous documentation presented in the book, Ethel Rosenberg in all likelihood did not commit the crime for which she was executed, and may not have even consciously spied for the USSR;
2) Based on the voluminous documentation presented in the book, Julius Rosenberg in all likelihood did not commit a capital crime, but he was a spy for the USSR;
3) The arrest, trial, and execution of the Rosenbergs was justified and was in fact a triumph of American justice, and people on the Left who still criticize it are simply refusing to face reality, and are hopeless dupes at best, if not outright apologists for treason.
Now, the only way I see 1) and 2) implying 3) is by accepting an unstated assumption something like the following: Julius deserved death because he was a Soviet spy, and Ethel deserved death because she loved a Soviet spy.
OK, maybe I was just born to late and my coddled, TV- and marijuana-addled brain is incapable of grasping the iron logic of that Greatest Generation that brought us the Cold War--but I don't get it.
BTW, I'm apparently not alone in my confusion. I checked out Amazon.com, where one can add one's own amateur book review. (Yes, I know this represents neither scholarly evidence nor a scientific sample. It’s amusing, OK?) There were three.
One said, "The book centers on that misuse of judicial power and how the Rosenberg's' [sic] were executed through the lynch mob mentality. The overwhelming evidence presented in this book amazed me."
Another said, "For over thirty years, there was controversy sorrounding [sic] the Rosenbergs' trial. We heard the evidence was faked, that the witnesses were unreliable, that there was a more than reasonable doubt as to the Rosenbergs' guilt. This is the book that settled all that for all rational readers. Ronald Radosh and Joyce Milton used the Freedom of Information Act to obtain thousands of pages of documents from the FBI files, as well as interviews with surviving major participants, and showed beyond any reasonable doubt that the Rosenbergs and Morton Sobell were guilty as charged, and fairly tried to boot. Since then, the collapse of the USSR and the release of the VENONA decrypts have provided additional proof they were right on all major points (this evidence is reviewed in the new introduction)."
Oh, yeah, three reviews. The other one said: "I read the book only to determine whether or not Clinton should be executed for selling W88 secrets to China. The answer is yes, Clinton should be executed post haste."
The intellectual legacy and logic of the Cold War--I don't get it.
>From: JKSCHW at aol.com
>Reply-To: lbo-talk at lists.panix.com
>To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com>
>Subject: Re: Radosh/Rosenberg File
>Date: Fri, 13 Oct 2000 16:20:29 EDT
>
>It's been pretty clear from the start that the information Julis Rosenberg
>gave the Soviets was almost worthless. It concerned the "lens" design for
>the
>TNT that imploded the plutonium in a Fat-Man style bomb. Pieces of TNT were
>specially shaped so that the plutonium "grapefruit" was squeezed equally
>all
>around by the explosion. Otherwise it wouls just spurt rather than fission.
>If there was anything in what J gave the Soviets, it was the idea that
>lenses
>were to be used. But the Soviets had already figured taht out on their own,
>as well as getting the infro from physicist-spy Klaus Fuchs.
>
>What JR was unable to provide to the Soviets was the specs on the lens
>design, which were precise and delicate. But this was crucial to the design
>of an atomic bomb. So, even supposing for the sake of argument that it
>might
>have been a good thing for the Soviets to get a bomb, JR did not help the
>Soviets (much) to do it. --jks
>
>In a message dated Fri, 13 Oct 2000 4:02:24 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>"Charles Brown" <CharlesB at CNCL.ci.detroit.mi.us> writes:
>
><<
>
> >>> LeoCasey at aol.com 10/13/00 01:49PM >>>
>In a message dated 10/13/2000 1:18:22 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>owner-lbo-talk-digest at lists.panix.com writes:
>
><< I thought _The Rosenberg File_ was holding up quite well...
>
>
> (((((((((((
>
> CB: But it wouldn't have been good for humanity for the U.S. to be the
>only
>country with nuclear weapons, no ? I mean especially from the standpoint of
>the Koreans and Viet Namese or even the Soviets. But even the Cubans. What
>would have become of the post WWII colonial independence movement , if the
>U.S. had a monopoly on the bomb ? >>
>
>Talk about argument by non sequitur. What does the response have to do with
>the original contention? One could grant the argument of the response in
>its
>entirety, and it would still have no impact on whether or not Radosh was
>right that Julius -- but not Ethel -- Rosenberg did participate in
>espionage,
>or that the trial was not a fair one.
>
>((((((((((((
>
>CB: Gee, you aren't too good at logic. I didn't say anything about whether
>or
>not Julius Rosenberg did it. What I implied ( but you are too dense to
>get)
>is that if he did do it, wasn't it a good thing ?
>
>
>
>
> >>
>
>
_________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
Share information about yourself, create your own public profile at http://profiles.msn.com.