Customer Reviews

The Rosenberg File: Second Edition

5 star:		(6)
4 star:		(3)
3 star:		(0)
2 star:		(1)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

The Radosh book concerning the Rosenberg case is a much fuller and more comprehensive treatment of the case than is the more recent book, The Brother, by Sam Roberts. The Brother is based on the current recollections of Ethel Rosenberg's brother David Greenglass who fingered both Ethel and Julius in testimony. David also served a number of years for espionage, himself, as part of same case.

...The Rosenberg File ... makes it very, very clear that Julius was certainly part of a communist espionage ring in the NY City area for years during WWII. The Venona Files also make the same case. It is Ethel who was probably not actually guilty of active espionage activities. It should be said, also, that both Rosenbergs could have saved themselves by telling the truth. Ethel might well not even have been charged, and Julius would almost certainly not have gotten the chair. But, they chose to lie right up to the end and be martyrs for the communist cause. The Radosh book, strongly documents the case against Julius and is also forthright about the weakness of the case against Ethel.

Read both The Rosenberg File for completeness and The Brother by Sam Roberts for a facinating sidelight from the point of view of one of the central characters in the story.

For over thirty years, there was controversy surrounding 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). A great work of scholarship, and a heck of a good true crime thriller.

When Ronald Radosh and Joyce Milton began the research for this book, many people across the political spectrum became uncomfortable. That is because this is an actual work of history, rather than an ideological screed masquerading as history. Radosh and Milton have been faithful to the historian's profession: they have interviewed, they have researched, and they have made an honest, ethical attempt to answer the crucial historical question: "What really happened?"

Ideologues on the left and the right have feared and criticized this book because it does a thorough job of lifting the fog of ideology and shedding light on events. What really happened to the Rosenbergs? The revelations are shocking, debunking years of mythology that, even now, continues to be taught in public schools by overindoctrinated teachers. Julius was, indeed, a spy for the USSR, and his wife was fully supportive of his activities, a minor accomplice. They did indeed pass on crude atomic information to the USSR. The USSR would have built an atomic bomb by 1950 at the latest even without the Rosenberg's information. A New York judge used the Rosenbergs to further his career and imposed an unrealistically harsh sentence. President Eisenhower approved of the Rosenberg execution as a warning to anyone else who would spy on the USA. Most of the Rosenberg's most vocal defenders were well aware of their guilt, even as they proclaimed their innocence. Finally, the Rosenbergs could have saved themselves, but chose to put their politics above their children.

These revelations will continually be tested and challenged. Nevertheless, it is unlikely that they will be overturned any time soon. Radosh and Milton have amassed an awesome array of primary and secondary source evidence supporting their conclusions, including interviews of surviving witnesses, court documents, and a review of the scientific evidence -- with only passing reference to the formidable Venona decrypts, which fully corroborate their conclusions.

This book is highly recommended for an understanding of the Cold War era.

The Rosenberg case has faded with time and turned into a diffuse urban legend. Facts are rarely possessed by those who are most vehement about the case. This book puts an end to the hodge-podge of information that led some people to believe the Rosenbergs were innocents framed by the government. The truth is that they were spies, they were communists, and they engaged in treason. The Soviets would have acquired The Bomb with or without the Rosenbergs. That doesn't mitigate their guilt for hastening the information to our enemy. The Rosenbergs weren't tried for what they believed. They were tried for what they did. And they were killed for what they did not do--which was recant. Sworn communists, they chose death instead of life. A selfish, stupid choice that placed a worthless ideology over the needs of their two young children, who have written worthwhile books about growing up as orphans of two of the most infamous American traitors. This book ends the speculation that they were innocent, that they had no chance to save their lives by recanting. Here are the latest facts and the fullest account of a chapter in American history that continues to be a vital flashpoint for people on either side of the political spectrum.

The Radosh book concerning the Rosenberg case is a much fuller and more comprehensive treatment of the case than is the more recent book, The Brother, by Sam Roberts. The Brother is based on the current recollections of Ethel Rosenberg's brother David Greenglass who fingered both Ethel and Julius in testimony. David also served a number of years for espionage, himself, as part of same case.

The review by a recent reviewer which states that The Rosenberg File clears Juius and Ethel apparently has not read this book which makes it very, very clear that Julius was certainly part of a communist espionage ring in the NY City area for years during WWII. The Venona Files also make the same case. It is Ethel who was probably not actually guilty of active espionage activities. It should be said, also, that both Rosenbergs could have saved themselves by telling the truth. Ethel might well not even have been charged, and Julius would almost certainly not have gotten the chair. But, they chose to lie right up to the end and be martyrs for the communist cause. The Radosh book, strongly documents the case against Julius and is also forthright about the weakness of the case against Ethel.

Read both The Rosenberg File for completeness and The Brother by Sam Roberts for a facinating sidelight from the point of view of one of the central characters in the story.

The Rosenberg File (2nd edition) by Ronald Radosh and Joyce Milton is a gargantuan piece of superb literary research. The authors take the reader into the dark world of Soviet espionage within the latter part of the decade preceding the war, during the war, and shorlty thereafter.

The ideological sympathies portrayed by many Americans towards Soviet Russia during this time period is no secret, but many took their ideals and sympathies too far! The Rosenbergs, and their accomplices were prime examples of those individuals.

The book reads like an ongoing novel, but...this novel is true. The authors do a magnificent job in laying out each "player" in this "Great Amercian Tragedy." The reader is allowed a glimpse into the formative years of each personality which ultimately enhances the events and story line as it starts to unravel. The crumbling "house of cards" follows the arrest and incarceration of Dr. Klaus Fuchs (who should have been extradited from England and stood trial along with the Rosenbergs!)

The authors present enough recent information (i.e.; FBI files, Venona Intercepts, KGB archives, and publications) to confirm (without a doubt), that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were guilty as charged.

The court room testimony, and drama revealed in the book is as unique, and moving as anything one could ever find within the Nuremberg trials.

The only criticism I would mention is that a book of this size (616 pages including notes and index section) should have had numerous photo plates. In addition, a little more information (if there is any) on Ruth Greenglass would have been appreciated. After all, a woman with the code name of "OSA" (Wasp) deserves a little more study and explanation. Did her Soviet handlers know her better than her husband?

The Rosenberg File (second edition) is actually a "6-Star" book with a 5 star rating.

This book would appeal to anyone who has had an interest in how atomic secrets were leaked from the US. It is VERY detailed; if you simply want a quick read, this is not the book to choose. However, it is well-written, with an updated addendum at the end containing previously unrleased details about the case. Highly recommended for anyone who enjoys 20th century US history.

Julius and Ethel Rosenberg's conviction of espionage and their execution as traitors remains one of the most controversial criminal cases in American history. J. Edgar Hoover, director of the FBI, called it the "crime of the century" (p. xx). Many believe in the Rosenbergs' innocence, adamantly proclaiming their execution resulted from an anti-Communist crusade. Still others see only smoke and mirrors in the Rosenbergs' claims of innocence, vilifying them as spies who sold the secret of the atomic bomb to the Russians. Radosh and Milton enter the fray, extensively reanalyzing the evidence in the case, including over 200,000 FBI documents newly released under the Freedom of Information Act.
In a lengthy preface, Radosh and Milton admit their book's controversial nature. While neglecting to address its criticisms, the authors comfortably declare the book "the most careful and balanced assessment" of the Rosenberg case (p. xvii). They attempt to bolster this claim through their own experiences with the evidence. Radosh describes, as a high school student, participating in a death vigil for the Rosenbergs, firmly convinced of their status as "martyred innocents" (p. xix). In his adulthood, Radosh felt strongly that a reexamination of the evidence would "prove the complicity of the government in a frame-up" (p. xx). As a trained historian, Radosh claimed he objectively dug into the evidence to search for the truth, no matter the consequences (p. xxii). He defended his motives:
As a man of the democratic Left, I certainly had no interest in serving the cause of domestic reaction or in justifying the actions of the new Cold Warriors. But historical truth also had its claims--even if some of that truth was unpleasant. To deny this would be to concede that the Left stands for falsehood--for the perpetuation of a myth regardless of the facts of the matter and, ultimately, for the right to define truth as whatever myth or constellation of myths serves the interest of a particular political position (p. xxiv).

As Radosh explored the evidence in the case, he became convinced that the Rosenbergs led an "extensive" spy network and that they actually committed the crimes alleged (p. xxiii).
Milton claims a similar journey. She "too originally held the conviction that Julius and Ethel Rosenberg were innocent victims of a government frame-up" (p. xxiv). Through working with Radosh, she also changed her opinion of the Rosenbergs' guilt. The authors' stories explain the book's title: A Search for the Truth. Radosh and Milton present their work as the definitive treatment, alleging that the unbiased evidence alone will convince innocence-believers that the Rosenbergs actually committed treasonous offenses.
The authors cite Miriam and Walter Schneir's Invitation to an Inquest, in which the Schneirs asserted the Rosenbergs' innocence. Milton indicates she "found their arguments convincing" (p. xxv). Yet Radosh and Milton dismiss Invitation to an Inquest as "undoubtedly the brief for the defense that [defense attorney] Emanuel Bloch was never able to prepare adequately" (p. 43). Radosh and Milton reject a one-sided perspective and assert that their study remains balanced. Unfortunately, Radosh and Milton's book seeps of deep bias and a refusal to consider both sides of the evidence. Instead of presenting both sides of the case, Radosh and Milton present only the prosecution's view while they systemically dismantle every aspect of the defense. Contrary to their assertions, The Rosenberg File reads like a pro-prosecution argument and not like an unbiased search for the truth.
Radosh and Milton tell a simple story. The FBI discovered a KGB code book that led them to a British scientist named Klaus Fuchs who had been recruited to work on the Manhattan Project. Fuchs admitted to passing information about the atomic bomb to the Soviet Union through a courier named "Raymond" who later turned out to be chemist Harry Gold. Initially, Fuchs failed to identify Gold in a photo lineup, but subsequently identified him after FBI prompting. When agents questioned Gold, he admitted relaying messages between Soviet agents and identified one such agent, David Greenglass. Under interrogation pressure, Greenglass named other agents, including his sister Ethel Rosenberg and her husband, Julius. The Rosenbergs, when arrested and questioned, strongly maintained their innocence and lack of involvement in espionage.
Assessing the evidence in the case, Radosh and Milton conclude that "Julius Rosenberg, amateur though he may have been, managed over a period of years to become the coordinator of an extensive espionage operation whose contacts were well placed to pass on information on top-secret military projects in the fields of radar and aeronautics. Ethel Rosenberg probably knew of and supported her husband's endeavors ..." (p. 450).
They base this conclusion on their independent investigation. However, none of Radosh and Milton's evidence solidly supports their conclusion. They admit as such, stating the case lacks "hard information," yet somehow remain comfortable concluding guilt based on nothing more than unfounded accusations and conjecture (p. 451).
Radosh and Milton claim this as a work of serious historical scholarship. However, one glaring flaw presents itself repeatedly throughout the narrative. Radosh and Milton do not gather the evidence from both sides and objectively assess the evidence's strengths or weaknesses. They present the prosecution narrative a step at a time and dismiss any defense objections to it. The authors never assess the defense evidence other than to attack or dismiss it. The authors' bias reveals itself so readily that the text lacks any appearance of impartiality.
A few examples demonstrate the authors' lack of objectivity. After Julius Rosenberg's initial interrogation, officers released him. Rosenberg returned to his life and did not flee. Why, the authors ask. "One explanation," they say, "was that he was innocent" (p. 93). The authors then spend ten pages listing several possible explanations for remaining home, including his desire to "look" innocent. They lack any evidence for these assertions other than pure conjecture. The authors devote one sentence to the innocence explanation and spend ten pages attacking it. Examples like this occur so frequently though the narrative that it becomes extremely difficult to view Radosh and Milton's text as an unbiased look at the case or the evidence.
The case surrounding Ethel Rosenberg, in particular, further emphasizes the authors' overall bias. Ethel, according to the evidence, allegedly participated in conversations in which Julius conducted espionage activities and typed key traitorous documents. The prosecutor said Ethel's activities consisted largely of typing each key, "blow by blow against her own country, in the interests of the Soviets" (p. 167). Radosh and Milton admit the dearth of evidence in support of these allegations, which "rest[] entirely on the Greenglasses' uncorroborated word and plac[e Ethel] in an accessory role at best" (p. 98).
In fact, the Greenglasses' original statements to the FBI failed to name Ethel as a conspirator. Only after the Hoover arrested and charged Ethel to "leverage" the case against Julius, and after an FBI meeting with Gold and the Greenglasses, did the Greenglasses change their story (p. 99). Why the change, the authors ask. "One obvious possibility is the desire to shield Ethel," the authors conclude, but fail to consider the other "obvious" possibility that the FBI coerced the Greenglasses into changing their story (p. 164). Since the Greenglasses spent time with the Rosenbergs, the authors summarily conclude the Greenglasses must have told the truth: "The Greenglasses were close to both Julius and Ethel and in all probability their opinion of Ethel's complicity is correct" (p. 167). Additionally, since Soviets often recruited husbands and wives, the authors say, and since Ethel refused to remain a passive housewife, they conclude she fit the mold of a spy. The authors make these conclusions again without evidence. "When it comes to assessing hard evidence, however, the case for Ethel's involvement becomes more difficult to document" (p. 167).
The authors acknowledge the lack of "hard information" of Ethel's active participation and admit that the case against her "was based in large part on a last-minute change of testimony by the key witnesses against her and was relatively weak, even so" (p. 451). Despite these concerns, they easily conclude her guilt in perhaps one of the more offensive leaps of logic in the book:
Ethel was undoubtedly being used as a pawn to push Julius into confessing. This does not mean that anyone in the Justice Department believed they were persecuting [sic] an innocent woman. ... Indeed, based on the entire range of evidence, it would be hard to imagine that Ethel did not know and approve of her husband's activities. Perhaps she was even his full partner ... . Living with a man who saw himself as a "soldier of Stalin" could not have been easy (p. 102).

Radosh and Milton decide, without a shred of hard evidence, that Ethel "perhaps" partnered with Julius based on nothing other than the authors' speculation. Additionally, the authors derogatorily name Julius Rosenberg a "soldier of Stalin." The inflammatory word choice reveals the authors' bias against the Rosenbergs.
According to Radosh and Milton, Ethel ended up losing her life because she engaged in espionage. Yet their own evidence supports a much stronger purpose motivating Ethel's execution: Ethel failed to comport herself with dominant gender roles. She "failed to display the proper signs of victimization" (p. 260). Ethel's "behavior on the witness stand" established her as a dominant woman, which "cost her her life" (p. 260). J. Edgar Hoover sympathized with Ethel initially until he discovered her negative maternal qualities:
[Hoover] continued to regard Ethel as an accomplice who could "be presumed to be acting under the influence of her husband." ... In the category of humane considerations, Hoover chose to stress not Ethel's sex per se but her situation as the mother of two small children. Incredibly, Hoover appears to have been the only government official to raise this objection to the prospect of a double execution that would leave two children orphaned. Perhaps Hoover was primarily worried about the wave of public sympathy that the children's plights might generate. Then again, Hoover may have found the prospect of Ethel's execution genuinely repugnant. The bachelor Hoover had been closer to no one than to his own mother, sharing her house and caring for her devotedly until she died after a long illness in 1938, and an idealized conception of motherhood appears to have been as much a part of his ideological makeup as his reflexive hatred for "subversives." Significantly, he was not to change his mind about Ethel's fate until much later, when secret FBI reports gave him an excuse for convincing himself that Ethel was not a good mother after all (p. 280-81).

When asked why he failed to pardon Ethel, President Dwight D. Eisenhower stated that Ethel deserved death because she was "the more strong-minded and the apparent leader of the two" (p. 378).
At no point do Radosh and Milton analyze the blatant gender discrimination motivating Ethel's prosecution and execution. Ethel, it appears, deserved to be executed because she took on masculine roles. Women who refuse to conform to societal expectations become outcasts and degenerates. The prosecution successfully demonized Ethel as an overly-masculine woman, which ultimately landed her in the electric chair. Radosh and Milton refuse to consider these possibilities, concluding instead that because Ethel married Julius, she must have "known and approved of [his] activities" (p. 102). The fact that Radosh and Milton so willingly condemn Ethel without considering the lack of evidence or barefaced gender discrimination undermines their objectivity.
Much of the book contains the authors' assertion that defense attorney, Emanuel Bloch sabotaged the case to appease Communists. Bloch "had to tread carefully in [his] cross-examinations lest [he] turn up matters better left buried" (p. 203). Bloch "had to know that the Communist element ... could only be satisfied by the Rosenbergs' martyrdom" and so he sabotaged his argument at the Supreme Court (p. 409). Bloch prevented the Rosenbergs' new trial because it "might well place in jeopardy accomplices who had so far escaped prosecution" (p. 400). Again, no evidence supports any of these claims. In fact, Bloch asserted until his death the Rosenbergs' innocence (p. 209). Radosh and Milton continually speculate and assign motives to parties without data or evidence.
The authors rely on 200,000 FBI documents as conclusive proof of many of their assertions. Yet they acknowledge in a bibliographical note that the FBI files were routinely destroyed, altered, or edited if "the release of classified information ... would damage the national defense" (p. 478). They claim, even in the face of contradictory evidence, that "this is not the case with the Rosenberg material" (p. 478). The authors validate the FBI documents as authoritative "proof" of the Rosenberg's guilt. However, they tacitly admit that "the files do, as a matter of course, contain deletions" and that "the FBI has refused to release a great deal of material on security grounds" (p. 478). Radosh and Milton's willingness to condemn the Rosenbergs based on the reports of an agency which admittedly alters, destroys, and refuses to release information pertinent to the case further evidences their lack of objectivity.
Nonetheless, Radosh and Milton engaged in an exhaustive study. They extensively footnote the entire text and rely heavily on primary source material. They assert that when possible, they sought to confirm every fact through multiple sources. When a fact rests on only one source, Radosh and Milton identify the fact as such and openly admit the fact's lack of independent verification. The authors appear to have thoroughly engaged in primary research and attempt to justify their conclusions with as much evidence as possible.
At the end, one conclusion remains certain from Radosh and Milton's work: the FBI, in over 200,000 pages of documents, could not produce one piece of hard evidence against Julius and Ethel Rosenberg other than the word of questionable witnesses. Unfortunately, Radosh and Milton's work reveals an FBI, a prosecutor, and a judge who willingly sent two potentially innocent people to their deaths based on speculative evidence. Did Radosh and Milton discover "the truth" on their journey? Regrettably, Radosh and Milton not only failed to find the truth, they only created more questions surrounding the guilt or innocence of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg.

Eisenhower, Stalin, the Cold War, the Korean War, atomic bombs, atomic spies, air raid shelters, the "Red Scare", McCarthyism and the Rosenbergs- in the mist of time these were early, if undigested terms, from my childhood. Ah, the Rosenbergs. That is what I want to write about today. Out of all of those undigested terms that name is the one that still evokes deep emotion in these old bones. For those who have forgotten or those too young to remember the controversy surrounding their convictions for espionage in passing information about the atomic bomb to the now defunct Soviet Union and their executions defined an essential part of the 1950's, the formation of the Cold War period in American history. Their controversial convictions and sentencing evoked widespread protests throughout the world. Thus, those who seek to learn the lessons of history, and about justice American-style should take the time to carefully examine the case and come to some conclusions about it.

Frankly, I have not, until recently when I read the updated The Rosenberg File by Ronald Radosh and Joyce Milton (written originally in 1983), read any new books on the case so that one of my tasks was to re-read the old material, read the new post-Soviet material, and make some suggestions about what to look for in trying to understand its history. This book, for friend or foe of the memory of the Rosenbergs, is a good place to start.

And what is the scholarship on the case? Was their trial a frame-up in classic American-style against leftist political opponents of the Cold War and American foreign policy? Were they, individually or collectively, "master spies" at the service of the Soviet Union? Were they innocent, if misguided, progressives caught up in the turmoil of the American "red scare" of the post-World War II period? Did the government through its FBI and other security agencies, its attorneys, its judges stumble into a case which would make many reputations? Did the American Communist Party, itself under severe scrutiny, betray the Rosenbergs? Did the various international campaigns on behalf of the couple work at cross purposes with their various demands for a new trial, reduction of sentence and clemency? What kind of people were these Rosenbergs? In short, were the Rosenbergs heroic Soviet spies, martyrs, dupes or innocents? Those are the questions thoughtful readers are confronted with and are fully examined in this book.

Let me add that very few people are neutral on the question of the Rosenbergs, and give the nature of the case no one should be. The authors here are convinced of their guilt in the legal sense and that seems to be good enough for them, although they have some issues about the propriety of the executions. My take on the meaning of the case is different which reflects a different political perspective from the authors. As the title of this piece indicates they stood up for the cause they believed in, the defense of the Soviet Union, and they did not flinch when the consequences of their actions required they pay the highest price. Whether you agree or not, if the reader is merely interested in the spy thriller "who dunnit" aspect of the case and getting the 'bad guys' rather than a thorough review of the case and its political ramifications perhaps one should look elsewhere.

One of the most controversial cases of espionage in American History is the Rosenberg's'. This book is about that case and the evidence surrounding the lives of those involved.

The book centers on that misuse of judicial power and how the Rosenberg's' were executed through the lynch mob mentality. The overwhelming evidence presented in this book amazed me.

Any sane and rational thinking human being would be able to understand the clear and precise information presented in this book. You need know a great deal about the case to understand the writing.

Using every technique to find information the authors have done themselves proud. The collection of facts presented here would convince any jury that a great miscarriage of justice was performed. It is time to correct that wrong.