Robert Meeropol





Robby, Abel, Michael and trains








my perennial chaos

"Robby & Elli" 1968


http://coolclimate.berkeley.edu/carboncalculator



Robby speaking at the re-launch of the Mary Pitawanakwat Fund in Toronto

Robby and Cory work on the blog.

Click Edit on the top toolbar to begin blogging.


Tags

STILL OUT ON A LIMB

A Humbling Experience

June 23, 2015

Tags: Admitting errors, Grand Jury testimony, Manny Bloch

I grew up thinking I knew the answers. My adoptive parents and their friends told me that my birth parents were innocent. So did my older brother. I held this emotion-based belief until age eighteen, when I read the trial transcript and Walter and Miriamís Schneirís book, INVITATION TO AN INQUEST. Then I became intellectually certain that my parents had done nothing illegal, except lie about their Communist Party membership. Moreover, I was sure that David and Ruth Greenglass hadnít stolen any secrets either, but were coerced by the government into inventing their crimes.

The Schneirís thesis that no espionage took place contradicted the trial strategy of Manny Bloch, my parentsí attorney. Manny conceded that crimes had taken place; he argued that the Greenglasses were guilty and pinned them on my parents to shift the blame.

When I was in my twenties, I thought that Mannyís acceptance of a key aspect of the governmentís case was just one of many critical errors he made at the trial. I also remember thinking how naive he was to lay the blame for my parentsí trouble at the feet of two unscrupulous individuals, rather than making a more systemic analysis that attributed the frame-up to the political manipulation of the federal law enforcement bureaucracy.

It is a humbling experience to have studied a historical event for decades, to be among a handful of experts on the Rosenberg Case, and yet realize that a significant portion of my analysis has been wrong. It is even more disconcerting because this has happened at least four times.

1. My beliefs started unraveling when I went to law school. Thatís when I understood that even though we had shown that the government witnesses lied and invented evidence, this did not prove my parentsí innocence. That shook me up. How could I know for sure if Ethel and Julius Rosenberg had engaged in a secret conspiracy to aid the Soviet Union?

Admitting I could be wrong about things I once knew were true, replacing certainty with doubt, was not an easy transition. When I wrote AN EXECUTION IN THE FAMILY, I had to grapple with my feelings about the possibility that my parents had engaged in high-risk political actions even though they had small children. Given my childhood experiences I would have probably made other decisions. But still, I prefer that my parents were activists who remained true to their beliefs, and not just innocent victims.

2. Morton Sobellís 2008 admission that he and Julius provided secret military-industrial information to the Soviet Union during and after World War II convinced me that my father had committed non-atomic espionage in the 1940ís. This time I found the change easier to accept because I had admitted errors previously and speculated that some of my answers might still be wrong. I wasnít an academic or investigator who had staked his professional career to a particular Rosenberg Case thesis. As my parentsí son, I was not blinded by visions of career advancement, but instead wanted to know the truth. Although it is difficult to come to terms with family guilt, I found closure in accepting it.

3. I was also wrong about my uncle and aunt, David and Ruth Greenglass (see my 5/12/15 blog: Big Rosenberg Case News on the Horizon.) Ruthís Grand Jury testimony, which I expect will be matched by Davidís when it is released, shows that they werenít merely weaklings who caved in to government demands. Instead they were amoral, conniving criminals who pinned their actions on my parents.

4. Finally, I was wrong about Manny Bloch. His analysis in 1951 was more accurate than the one I had developed. I wonder now if my parents confided in Manny, giving him knowledge and a context in which to place the Greenglassí perfidy.

No one is always right, yet often we cling to beliefs in what amounts to political fundamentalism, causing us to reject facts that donít fit our world view. When we must admit that a cherished opinion is mistaken, we may react with cynicism or disengagement. I donít know why it is so hard to admit mistakes and still continue to engage the world, often with a more nuanced perspective. I understand that letting go of long-held convictions can be difficult. However, refusing to reconsider despite newly revealed information is a much bigger problem.

Big Rosenberg Case News on the Horizon

June 12, 2015

Tags: Grand Jury transcripts, David Greenglass, Ruth Greenglass

Last month Federal Judge Alvin Hellerstein ordered the release of David Greenglassí 1950 Grand Jury testimony against my parents, Ethel and Julius Rosenberg. The statements of most of the Grand Jury witnesses, including Ruth Greenglass, were released in 2008, but at that time David Greenglass was still alive and objected to the release of his testimony. Greenglass family members still object, and the window to appeal Hellersteinís ruling has not yet closed, so a further delay remains possible. It is more likely, however, that there will be no appeal, and this final disclosure will occur before the end of the summer.

This is big news. When Ruth Greenglassí testimony was released, it caused a minor sensation in the mainstream media. Although she was a cooperating witness and under oath, Ruth made no mention of my mother typing David Greenglassí handwritten notes. At trial the next year, both the Greenglasses swore that Ethel typed notes from their key espionage meeting; that testimony resulted in my motherís execution.

If Davidís statements echo Ruthís, they will provide further proof that David and Ruth invented their decisive testimony against my mother at some time between their Grand Jury appearance and the trial. That would not surprise me; after reviewing the FBI files and other records in the 1980ís, my brother and I came to that conclusion, although the mainstream media ignored us. However, I did not expect that either Ruthís or Davidís Grand Jury testimony would differ so starkly from what they swore to at trial.

I predict that when Davidís transcript is released, the media will pounce on this increasingly compelling evidence of my motherís innocence. Thatís a bombshell, but they may miss the bigger story.

The core of the governmentís case was that my parents met with the Greenglasses on September 25th, 1945 at the Rosenberg apartment in New York City. At that meeting, the Greenglasses claimed, David gave a sketch of the cross-section of the atomic bomb to my father, and Ethel typed Davidís accompanying hand-written notes. The prosecutor claimed this drawing gave away the most important secret known to mankind, and in summarizing the case against Ethel, dramatically stated that as Ethel hit the keys, she struck blow upon blow against her country.

What the media missed is that Ruthís Grand Jury testimony made no mention whatsoever of the September 25th meeting. I bet Davidís wonít mention it either. Iím confident of this because a careful analysis of Soviet and US Government files indicate that Ruth Greenglass transmitted Davidís sketch to a KGB agent, without my parentsí involvement, on December 21st, 1945 and that the sketch was logged in to the KGB files on December 27th. There is no evidence, other than the Greenglassís trial testimony, that a September meeting ever took place. Furthermore, Davidís sketch was flawed and worthless, and if it had been given to my father in September it should have arrived in Moscow no later than early October.

In sum, the impending release of David Greenglassís Grand Jury testimony is likely to provide powerful proof that David and Ruth Greenglass invented the critical September meeting to shift blame from themselves to my parents. It remains to be seen whether our government knew that the Greenglasses were lying.

Selected Works

Memoir
"Bravery is rare. Tyranny is commonplace. Both define the life of Robert Meeropol, son of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg. In his heart-wrenching, honest memoir, Meeropol recounts the emotional terrors of his childhood, the kindness of Abel and Anne Meeropol-who adopted him and his older brother after their parents' execution-his struggle to vindicate his parents, and his own political activism, culminating in the creation of the Rosenberg Fund for Children, which he now directs."
ĖPublisher's Weekly
"one of those rare books everyone should read"
ĖJoyce Carol Oates

Quick Links