Another Fight For Vietnam Vets

Didn't one of the Rosenbergs' brother publicly state last year that he'd perjured himself under pressure on that case?
If true, what does that do to the "evidence"?

Regards,
Gordon

 

Some people sleep well somehow...Mr David Greenglass



---------------

False testimony clinched Rosenberg spy trial

BBC Thursday, 6 December, 2001

Ethel Rosenberg's own brother was the key witness Memories of one of the most controversial episodes of the Cold War, the trial and execution of Ethel and Julius Rosenberg as Soviet spies, have been revived with the confession of a key witness that he lied in court to protect himself.

David Greenglass, the younger brother of Ethel Rosenberg and himself a convicted spy, said he felt no remorse over his action which may have sent his sister to the electric chair. "I sleep very well," the 79-year old told an American television station in his first public appearance for more than 40 years.

"I would not sacrifice my wife and my children for my sister", says Greenglass.

At the trial in 1951, he said his sister typed up notes containing US nuclear secrets that were later turned over to the KGB, the Soviet intelligence service. The notes - typed on a portable Remington typewriter - apparently contained little that was new to the Soviets, but for the prosecution they clinched the case against Ethel Rosenberg.

This week Mr Greenglass said his testimony was not based on first-hand knowledge: "I don't know who typed it, frankly, and to this day I can't remember that the typing took place. I had no memory of that at all - none whatsoever." He said he gave false testimony to protect himself and his wife, Ruth, and that he was encouraged by the prosecution to do so.

David Greenglass admitted to spying for the Soviets, and was himself convicted of giving the Soviets information about nuclear research - but was spared execution in exchange for his testimony.

Asked whether his false testimony against his sister still haunted him 50 years later, Mr Greenglass said: "Every time I am haunted by it, my wife says 'Look, we are still alive.'"

Some 50 years later, Mr Greenglass believes he will be remembered by history as "a spy that turned his family in". But, he says, he does not care. "I had no idea they would give them the death sentence." And he says if he ever met the Rosenbergs' two sons he would say "sorry your parents are dead" but he would not apologise for his actions.

http://www.english.upenn.edu/~afilreis/50s/greenglass.html

------------

Still:

The National World (7th March, 1997)

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/USAgreenglass.htm

Alexander Feklisov, 83, a retired KGB officer who has stepped forward with a detailed account of the Rosenbergs' role. Feklisov said he held clandestine meetings with Julius Rosenberg in New York from 1943 to 1946 and claims to be the only Soviet intelligence officer alive with first-hand knowledge of the Rosenberg case.

He told The Washington Post and The New York Times that Rosenberg passed valuable secrets about U.S. military electronics but played only a peripheral role in Soviet atomic espionage. And he said Ethel Rosenberg did not actively spy but probably was aware that her husband was involved.

Feklisov said Julius Rosenberg recommended David Greenglass to him as a possible recruit in 1944.

Feklisov says the principal contributions by Rosenberg were secrets about U.S. military electronics. He cited Rosenberg's passing of a fully functioning proximity fuse, a secret World War II U.S. innovation that enables an anti-aircraft missile to bring down its target without hitting it. Rosenberg assembled a duplicate proximity fuse from discarded spare parts and smuggled it out of the Emerson Radio Factory in New York City in December 1944.

------------

Family is best???



-------------

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/americas/1695240.stm

[ 07. March 2004, 02:51 AM: Message edited by: Kai-Petri ]

 

Even though the Greenglasses changed their name and address, they were found in 1987 by Sam Roberts of the New York Times. David was living under an assumed name in a single-family house in the Queens, New York. After fourteen years, for monetary reasons alone, he decided to be interviewed by Roberts.

These interviews resulted in the book The Brother, published in the fall of 2001. In this book Greenglass admits that he lied on the witness stand. "My wife is my wife. I mean, I don't sleep with my sister, you know." From David Greenglass's point of view, such fidelity was commendable.

Further admission of perjury came on 60 Minutes II, December 5, 2001. It was this perjury that strapped his sister Ethel into the electric chair. According to Roberts, Greenglass, when asked if he would have done anything differently, replied "Never. "And when asked on 60 Minutes, why didn't the Rosenbergs talk (lie) and give names like he did, he said "In one word - stupidity."

More on the persons :

http://www.rosenbergtrial.org/plyrstxt1.html

 

One last thought here:

No matter what millions of Americans can think, liberalism is not communism in the exact same way that conservatism isn't fascism.

Classic liberalism —which I think many people who live in it don't know its name— is democracy as we know it: individual liberties, power division, free elections and capitalism.

Modern liberalism is a synonim for social democracy. Which, let me tell you also includes individual liberties, power division, free elections and capitalism too.

That is absolutely not communism. No matter what millions of Americans might think. The books say it as well as millions of other people around the world...

 

Freddie,
Wise words..as usual

Regards,
Gordon

 

I would say that the difference between democratic capitalism, Jeffersonian classical liberalism and modern socialist liberalism is more extreme than GdI Fred suggests. deTocqueville probably put it best: Democracy and socialism have nothing in common but one word: Equality. But the difference is while democracy seeks equality in liberty, socialism seeks equality in restraint and servitude.

Or, to put it another way, capitalism and classical liberalism allow each person to rise to the heights their own capabilities allow whereas socialism and modern liberalism seek to reduce all to the least common denominator....

 

I don't believe I said anything for or against ( wouldn't get that close to one.....Ca CHING!!) homosexuals, other than implied.

So I will state that I am against the raising of homosexual "unions' " status to that of marriage in the US. I think that is a mistake, and that any state Governor like "Ahhnoldt" Swartzenegger who has state laws against such things to defend ( the will of the people ) who allows a City Mayor to perform them is not doing HIS job. The grinning jackass Mayor of San Fransico should have been grinning through bars in Sacremento that first week.

Lurking homosexuals....oh my....

[ 09. March 2004, 12:10 PM: Message edited by: Texas Fred ]

 

I'll tell you where I got my information on communism, Mr. Friedrich - in a college classroom. I had a great old History Prof who had us copy down Carl Marx' Manifesto the last fifteen minutes of every class. He said if we missed a class not to worry about the notes on the class but we had better be sure to get the handwritten note book entries copied from a friend as they would be turned in for 1/3 of our grade at the end. He said do not run home and tell Mommie I am trying to indoctrinate you to be a good little communist, but the opposite.

He said he had done this for years and he could tell within a few pages if the weight of the hadwritten notes on communism's "Daddy" was too light. He said he did this because he wanted us to know our lifelong enemy and their thinking.

I have watched the developments of the struggle since 1960, a time when comrade Kruschev vowed to bury us, and I see no reason to disbelieve the old professor now. For one thing, he would not be able to gain tenure in the colleges of today while what I call the "democommie secularists" run wild on most all campuses Hillary Clinton's "It takes a Village" has been called the most dangerous book written since Herr Carl's in some debates. If Kerry is not a communist, he just missed the sign up party at Hanoi Janes's one night in th early 70s...

Thus I need no lecture from you about what communism is. You are too late to be helpful with that. And we, as Americans, don't really require the condesending European version or parse of words. As I have posted elsewhere, we've been setting our own agendas separate from Europe's rather successfully for several hundred years....

[ 09. March 2004, 12:45 PM: Message edited by: Texas Fred ]

 

Well, that phrase speaks volumes by itself. "Hidden Agendas" springs to mind.

Regards,
Gordon