The Brother: The Untold Story of Atomic Spy David Greenglass and How He Sent His Sister, Ethel Rosenberg, to the Electric Chair

Rating:
Summary: Reserve A Space for This Book in Your Library
Review: Although I was only nine years old when the Rosenberg's were executed on June 19, 1953, I do have vague recollections of their execution. The book is over 500 pages long but worth its length. Without going into lengthy details, as I understand the story, in 1945 Julius Rosenberg asked his sister-in-law, Ruth Greenglass, to suggest to her husband David, who was working on the Manhattan Project at Los Alamos, New Mexico, to provide details about the makings of the atomic bomb to be passed on to the Soviets. This David agreed to do since Russia had been an American ally during World War II. There appears to be some doubt as to what Ethel Rosenberg's role in this scheme was. Ethel apparently knew what her husband Julius was up to and was even agreeable to it. When her brother David was arrested, he agreed to cooperate with the government providing his wife would not be implicated. Instead David claimed that Ethel did the typing of his (David's) notes from Los Alamos. When author Sam Roberts interviewed David for the book David wavers as to who actually did the typing of his notes. He now states that it most likely was his wife Ruth. This apparently is where he is said to have sent his sister to the electric chair to save his wife Ruth. Would David have done this had he known a death sentence was facing his sister? From his interview with author Roberts I would have to say yes he would have although even though they were guilty they didn't deserve to die. One of the Rosenberg's two sons, Michael, is quoted as saying, "My mother went to the death house and Aunt Ruth goes home to make dinner." If you enjoy American history this is a book that you will want to make sure you have in your library. This is riveting American history.

Rating:
Summary: An important addition to Rosenberg spy ring history
Review: As one who has studied the Rosenberg case since reading Louis Nizer's "The Implosion Conspiracy" as a high school sophomore, I was glad to see this book published. Sam Roberts' interviews with David Greenglass are an important contribution to the body of Rosenberg case history and assure that Greenglass didn't go to his eternal reward without speaking something for the record. Although everyone would probably have liked Greenglass's explanations to be clearer, at least he has talked after 50 years... While I can agree that the Rosenbergs probably didn't pass on information that was of vital importance in the Soviets' developing an atom bomb, it's quite clear that both were devoted mind-numbed robots of Bolshevik lies and propaganda. For that reason, it's easy for most middle Americans such as myself to dislike them and believe that to some extent they deserved their punishment. Klaus Fuchs, Theodore Hall and others who actually deserved to die for their treachery, survived and completed their careers. Julius probably deserved life in prison and Ethel something on the order of 10 years or so. David Greenglass deserved more -- probably at least 25 years. While I doubt that either originally believed they would be executed, it's also obvious that they cherished their roles as Soviet heroes and martyrs -- their deaths contributing more to the cause of Communism than the fight against Communism. The Rosenbergs' sons have tried to maintain the leftist illusion of the couple's innocence, but this is probably partially to mask their pain in knowing their parents preferred the cause of Communism to surviving for their children. One other work that could add immensely to Rosenberg case scholarship is if co-conspirator Morton Sobell would tell the truth before he dies. This is unlikely as Sobell has also continued to serve the Radical Left since his release from prison in 1966. This is one of a series of recent works that proves what has been termed the "hysteria of the McCarthy era" was actually well founded suspicion that the Communists had spies everywhere and that American Communists were willing accomplices of Stalin and Moscow.

Rating:
Summary: rehash and one interview
Review: Author Sam Roberts has done a thorough job of telling the story of David Greenglass, so one is mystified at why he felt compelled to demonize his subject. Readers are fully capable of drawing their own conclusions about Greenglass, brother of Ethel Rosenberg. Roberts has given us more than enough material to sift through, his narrative skills are impressive. Actually one shouldn't be surprised at Roberts' bias, his contempt for Greenglass is obvious in the book's subtitle. Editorializing about Greenglass (who sold atomic bomb information to the Russians in 1945 while serving in the military at Los Alamos) should have been reserved for an afterword. This, along with sometimes excessive detail, are rather large blemishes on an otherwise exemplary work. Roberts provides a rich account of growing up a poor Jewish immigrant in 1930's New York, the U.S. during World War II and the homefront during the Cold War. But I'd have appreciated developing my own distaste for Greenglass, had that been my choice. Indeed it's possible to feel some sympathy for Greenglass and his plight.
This is, nonetheless an important work on the Rosenbergs, American Communist ideals and the curious business of spying.

Rating:
Summary: Reverberations
Review: David Halberstam's jacket blurb for Sam Robert's incredibly well-written book "The Brother" states that it is "...unsparing in its description of all the players in the case." That assessment couldn't be more dead-on. Mr. Roberts has combed the trial record, spoken to many of the surviving participants, scored the incredible coup of getting David Greenglass nailed down, and culled the voluminous secondary source material about the Rosenberg case to present crystalline portrayals of the stars of this doomed production. The reader learns that the trial judge, Irving Kaufman, conducted himself as little more than a prosecutor in a black robe. Instead of being a neutral arbiter he busily set about assuring that the Rosenbergs and Morton Sobell would be convicted by time and again plastering over holes in the government's case. Judge Kaufman had actively lobbied for the case to be assigned to him, going so far as to guarantee the lead prosecutor, Irving Saypol, that he would impose death sentences upon conviction. Judge Kaufman also had numerous ex parte meetings and phone conversations with both Mr. Saypol and Mr. Saypol's deputy, Roy Cohn, during the course of the trial in complete violation of the judicial canon of ethics. Mr. Saypol, later Judge Saypol, fares no better than Judge Kaufman. Mr. Roberts demonstrates conclusively that Mr. Saypol was the prime-mover in suborning the now self-confessed perjury of David Greenglass, particularly in the following instance-Ethel Rosenberg was as innocent as Julius Rosenberg was guilty. The mere fact that she was "cognizant" of her husband's activities, and approved of them, does not make her guilty. We have never been big on guilt by association in this country. Mr. Saypol had her indicted, in a capital case no less, to use this mother of two small boys as leverage against her husband, who the government dearly wanted to plead guilty and tell all. This gambit failed, and Mr. Saypol was left, on the eve of trial, with no evidence against Mrs. Rosenberg. Mr. Saypol then, with the help of David Greenglass's lawyer, O. John Rogge, had Mr. Greenglass "remember" that Mrs. Rosenberg had actually done the typing of Mr. Greenglass's hand-written notes about the classified information that he had stolen from Los Alamos. Ruth Greenglass, David's wife (and co-conspirator, though never indicted) also belatedly "remembered" the typing incident; neither Greenglass had mentioned it in any of their previous, numerous, debriefings with prosecutors. Mr. Saypol had his "overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy". He had his smoking gun.

Mr. Roberts, fair-minded to a fault, doesn't let the defense team off the hook either. Mr. Rosenberg's lawyer, Emanuel Bloch, comes off as tactically inept and obsequious. Mrs. Rosenberg was represented by Alexander Bloch, the seventy year-old father of Emanuel. This was the first criminal case he had ever tried. Both Bloch's were clearly out of their depth.

For whatever else this remarkable book is it is also an indictment of capital punishment in America. Sadly, the conditions that led to the very public burning of an innocent woman still exist. There are still unpopular defendants prosecuted by over-zealous prosecutors who are aided by politically motivated judges. There are still defense lawyers who represent people whose lives are on the line when they are not qualified to do so. This deadly confluence will continue to claim innocent lives until America joins the rest of the civilized world and abolishes capital punishment. Mr. Roberts is owed a great debt for elucidating this in "The Brother".

Rating:
Summary: The End of the Affair
Review: Sam Roberts found David Greenglass and persuaded him to talk for this very readable 500 page book. It tells of their family histories. How did David Greenglass get assigned to Los Alamos (p.70)? Perhaps due to his talents? He was cleared by Army and FBI investigators (p.71). Soviet atom bomb development began in 1939, they deduced American research in 1940 (p.80). Julius Rosenberg became involved with Soviet espionage, and a recruiter of people who could provide "technical information". The crime is committed when the message is relayed (p.92). Life in Oak Ridge or Los Alamos is likened to a socialist paradise where the government provides for everyone; but not all enjoy Army life (pp.100-1). None suspected that DG's insatiable curiosity was to gather information for a foreign government (p.104). Winston Churchill's scientists asked for dynamite lenses (p.107). How to steal a proximity fuse? Get a defective reject then replace the broken parts with working parts (p.109).

With the war over, DG was no longer interested in helping the Soviets (p.147). The Soviet atomic research resumed in 1943 (p.182), their first atomic test occurred in 1949. This affected the political outlook in Washington (p.183). When they deciphered a message on gaseous diffusion in refining uranium, this led to its author and prime suspect - Klaus Fuchs (p.188). Another deciphered message said a spy at Los Alamos went on vacation in Jan 1945 (p.197); 100 suspects were turned up. The two prime suspects were Luis Alvarez and Edward Teller - the best friend of Klaus Fuchs.

DG's confession is on page 242. He hired O. John Rogge and cooperated with the FBI; he could not testify against his wife (p.261). Greenglass and Gold were interviewed together to harmonize their stories (p.278). The Government wanted Julius Rosenberg to confess and identify other members of the spy ring (p.282); the death penalty was the threat (p.287). David was trained as a draftsman and had surprising neat handwriting (p.297). Page 317 says his handwriting needed to be typed, and this implicated Ethel in the crime. The trial found them all guilty. The Rosenbergs got death, but they insisted on their innocence and never cracked. They were convicted on the word of the Greenglasses alone, there was no independent corroborative evidence given at their trial. I think the failure to show spending or money from their spying was a failure in the Government's case. The rule is that spies get paid for their information ("The Double-Cross System").

Some questioned the scientific value of Greenglass' atom bomb sketch. It was "valuable information" to corroborate the information given by Klaus Fuchs (p.408). The 1946 Smyth Report gave much more information on atomic energy research than given by Klaus Fuchs (p.410)! Page 425 lists the information that Julius could give to delay their execution; nothing was asked of Ethel. President Eisenhower denied clemency because they "increased the chance of atomic war and may have condemned tens of millions of innocent people to death" (p.430).

Chapter 36 has Greenglass' "final confession". He thought the worse thing he did was working on the atomic bomb because it killed a hundred thousand people (p.469). He didn't regret his spying if it prevented another war (p.479). David and Ruth now said they didn't remember Ethel typing the notes, but "that's the way it would have been done" (p.483). Without this, Ethel might not have been convicted. Why didn't Julius and Ethel save themselves? Because it would mean putting other people in their hot seat (p.493). DG's verdict: they were guilty, but they didn't deserve to die (p.496). This disproportionate punishment may explain Pope Pius XII's call for clemency. The Prosecution team never again won distinction in their careers.

Rating:
Summary: An Informed Perspective after 50 Years!
Review: The trial & execution of Julius & Ethel Rosenberg for atomic espionage tore America apart--and remains to this day a subject of emotional debate & acrimony. The man whose testimony almost alone convicted them was Ethel Rosenberg's brother, David Greenglass, who was also the young man who spied for them at Los Alamos. Ethel & Julius were executed. David was given ten years & then put into the witness protection program, after which he disappeared somewhere in America. But author Sam Roberts found him, & then managed to convince Greenglass to talk for fifty hours. So here we have at last the mesmerizing inside story of the Rosenbergs. What were their lives like growing up on the Lower East Side, how was David enlisted to spy at the site of our greatest national secret, & how did the whole thing unravel & lead to the arrest of David, Ethel, & Julius? In addition to answering such questions, this book reveals how Greenglass perjured himself in testifying about his sister, Ethel, & her husband--testimony that virtually strapped them into the electric chair. It is the story of a family. It is a story of espionage. It is the story of a trial. This great narrative is far more captivating than anything else written on the subject. Convincingly & authoritatively, it tells a tale driven by secrets, suspense, & intense human interest.

Rating:
Summary: A Masterpiece
Review: This is one of the most brilliant works of non-fiction I have ever read. The trial and execution of Julius and Ethel Rosenberg has always been a sensitive and controversial subject for Americans. Although many authors have written books on the subject, only one has been able to talk to the chief witness who testified against the Rosenbergs and sent them to the electric chair for espionage, Ethel's brother, David Greenglass. Sam Roberts did some excellent research and has found a bounty of never before told information about the case and the family. Every chapter is more exciting than the one before it. Excellent job Sam

Rating:
Summary: Ronald Radosh's book is better than this one, but read both.
Review: When thinking of David Greenglass and the hatred his actions have invoked for half a century it seems reasonable to ask, as the author does, why is David Kaczynski who turned in his brother, better known as the Unabomber, not reviled? He knew his brother was likely to receive capital punishment for what he had done. Or how about Barbara Walker who turned in her husband, which then led to her son, being convicted as well, for being willing suppliers of information to the USSR. The Walkers are hardly serving time in a so-called, "Club Fed", and last I read the Unabomber will either die in prison of old age or execution.

The title of Sam Roberts' book is certainly accurate if incomplete. Testimony by David Greenglass absolutely placed his sister and brother in law in the midst of a scenario that would guaranty their conviction. But to be fair, his wife Ruth did not do the Rosenbergs any favors when she testified, and the Rosenbergs and their defense council made decisions that ensured their conviction as well.

Greenglass made it very clear that his wife came before anyone in his thinking, including his mother and father. When he came under FBI scrutiny it can hardly be considered a surprise that he either told some things that were true, or when faced with an alternative, he would place the blame on his sister or brother in law. The Rosenbergs did virtually nothing to exonerate themselves or cooperate to ensure they would not be subject to capital punishment. As both husband and wife took the stand and then exercised their right to not answer questions, which may have served to self-incriminate them, when from a practical standpoint answering yes would have done no more harm. It may be a constitutional protection, but I think juries take it as an admission of guilt. And what type of verdict could be expected when the defense lawyer, while arguing that the information at issue was not important, then simultaneously asks that it be impounded to protect its confidentiality?

Ethel Rosenberg probably did not deserve the punishment she received. I can only argue probably, for why would a woman who is innocent with 2 young children take positions, which were stated as first, final, and never subject to change? And how could a husband let his wife follow him to the chair? Many of the players in this issue were portrayed as young, idealistic, and foolish. I cannot accept that either of the Rosenbergs believed they would be found innocent. And further, rolling the dice on the sentence Ethel would receive in the midst of a country coming out of one war and was then engaged in Korea against the "ally" they helped, seems to be stupidity not a calculated risk.

The entire furor over David Greenglass and the degree to which he lied is of great interest to me, as people lying and making deals to mitigate their own punishment is hardly unique. Even if he believed with 100 percent certainty that his sister would be executed it was a choice he never even pondered, he and his family came first, period. Virtually any scenario a person may use with immediate family and heinous behavior again makes what Greenglass did less than unique. Parents killing their children, children their parents, spouses each other, it happens all too frequently. And there is a difference between speaking against someone and actually taking their life in person with one's own hands.

David Greenglass is not a person I would like to know much less be related to. The same comment holds true for his wife and both of the Rosenbergs. This book may add additional information to the historical record just as the judge at the Rosenberg trial will shed more light in 2026 when his papers are made public. I don't find anything sympathetic about either of these couples. One was willing to do and say whatever was needed to minimize their own punishment, and the other did little or nothing to change their fate.

As defined at the trial, the level of activity for guilt was not terribly high, so while of the four involved their actions may have differed widely, the law made little distinction. I don't see any way to demonstrate that Julius Rosenberg was innocent, and his wife was certainly not absolutely ignorant of his activities.

The title of my comments comes from a game that is part of game theory. It revolves around the actions of what people involved in the same crime should do for the benefit of all concerned, as opposed to what they actually do. These circumstances and the resulting behavior are fascinating to read about.