Menashe, btw, had a good essay in Socialist Revolution in the early 70's on Leninism. Respondents were Frank Broadhead and Harry Boyte. Michael Pugliese
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ron Radosh" <rradosh at mindspring.com> To: <Leocasey at aol.com>; "Pugliese Michael" <debsian at pacbell.net> Cc: "David Horowitz" <dhorowitz at earthlink.net>; "Louis Menashe" <lmenashe at duke.poly.edu> Sent: Friday, July 13, 2001 7:16 PM Subject: Rosenbergs
To Leo Casey and whatever list you posted this on: You are correct, Michael Pugliese forwarded your post to me. Yes, I did retire to a bar after Selma's funeral with members of DSA, but neither Mike nor Irving were there. Bogdan was, I recall, and others. But you are incorrect on a supposed desire on my part to have DSA or any other organization endorse my book. In my memoir, I was referring to my query to both Mike and Irving to write a blurb, as did Arthur M. Schlesinger Jr., William O'Neill and others. I wanted a blurb from them AS INDIVIDUALS, and as well known left-wing intellectuals, since I did not want only conservatives to endorse my findings. In my memoir, I refer to their refusal to do so, and what Mike said to me was said personally, and not at the bar session you are referring to. Moreover, Bogdan did at that meeting at the bar defend Mike's decision with his political rationale. I recall that others supported me and opposed his logic, particularly Ruth Messinger's friend and future campaign manager who died a few years ago, but whose name I do not at present recall. As for the Rosenberg case, I did not argue that Julius was guilty of "minor" espionage; indeed, his ring,-especially Perl, Barr and Sarant, supplied the Soviets with top level and major military data.Similarly, Ethel was an accomplice who suggested recruits to the KGB, and although she herself did nothing, she knew what Julius was engaged in. In a conspiracy indictment, that makes her party to the indictment and hence guilty. As for Mike Harrington and Irving Howe, they showed that party politics was indeed more important than the truth.