Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for ‘great bravery’
Ethel Rosenberg, who was executed with her husband for espionage in 1953, was honored Monday by the City Council on what would have been her 100th birthday.
Modal TriggerPhoto: Gregory P. MangoThree council members joined Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer in issuing two proclamations lauding Rosenberg, a Lower East Side resident, for “demonstrating great bravery” in leading a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co., where she worked as a clerk.
The proclamations also said she was “wrongfully” executed for helping her husband, Julius, pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.
“A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed,” said Councilman Daniel Dromm (D-Queens).
Sometimes I feel I've been transported to some alternate reality.
Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
Liberals aren't hiding it anymore. They are outright subversives.Sometimes I feel I've been transported to some alternate reality.
So how about we start seriously considering giving California to Mexico, and the entire northeast to Canada ?
City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for ‘great bravery’
Ethel Rosenberg, who was executed with her husband for espionage in 1953, was honored Monday by the City Council on what would have been her 100th birthday.
Modal TriggerPhoto: Gregory P. MangoThree council members joined Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer in issuing two proclamations lauding Rosenberg, a Lower East Side resident, for “demonstrating great bravery” in leading a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co., where she worked as a clerk.
The proclamations also said she was “wrongfully” executed for helping her husband, Julius, pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.
“A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed,” said Councilman Daniel Dromm (D-Queens).
City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for 'great bravery'
Liberals aren't hiding it anymore. They are outright subversives.Sometimes I feel I've been transported to some alternate reality.
So how about we start seriously considering giving California to Mexico, and the entire northeast to Canada ?
City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for ‘great bravery’
Ethel Rosenberg, who was executed with her husband for espionage in 1953, was honored Monday by the City Council on what would have been her 100th birthday.
Modal TriggerPhoto: Gregory P. MangoThree council members joined Manhattan Borough President Gale Brewer in issuing two proclamations lauding Rosenberg, a Lower East Side resident, for “demonstrating great bravery” in leading a 1935 strike against the National New York Packing and Supply Co., where she worked as a clerk.
The proclamations also said she was “wrongfully” executed for helping her husband, Julius, pass atomic secrets to the Soviet Union.
“A lot of hysteria was created around anti-communism and how we had to defend our country, and these two people were traitors and we rushed to judgment and they were executed,” said Councilman Daniel Dromm (D-Queens).
City Council honors Ethel Rosenberg for 'great bravery'
So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Sometimes I feel I've been transported to some alternate reality.
So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
And OJ is innocent, too.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
BTW, your Benghazi quip exposed your bias and and undermined your credibility.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Developments like this make the conclusion of Fail Safe a happy ending.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
Because I knew you were posting in the Benghazi threads? Are you saying you know less about Benghazi than you do about Ethel Rosenberg? Or are you just afraid to overtax your brain with updated information?BTW, your Benghazi quip exposed your bias and and undermined your credibility.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
I post in lots of threads. You specified Benghazi and that says more about you.Because I knew you were posting in the Benghazi threads? Are you saying you know less about Benghazi than you do about Ethel Rosenberg? Or are you just afraid to overtax your brain with updated information?BTW, your Benghazi quip exposed your bias and and undermined your credibility.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.I take it you're not familiar with Fail Safe.
You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
Neither would surprise me.
I post in lots of threads. You specified Benghazi and that says more about you.Because I knew you were posting in the Benghazi threads? Are you saying you know less about Benghazi than you do about Ethel Rosenberg? Or are you just afraid to overtax your brain with updated information?BTW, your Benghazi quip exposed your bias and and undermined your credibility.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.You take it incorrectly. Although I can see why you'd find a nuclear holocaust started by a mentally disturbed soldier appealing.
Now you tell the class what you know about Ethel Rosenberg.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
Neither would surprise me.
Oswald was a patsy, right?
She was convicted of espionage that led to the Cold War and she was executed. New York wants to honor her. That's pretty absurd.I post in lots of threads. You specified Benghazi and that says more about you.Because I knew you were posting in the Benghazi threads? Are you saying you know less about Benghazi than you do about Ethel Rosenberg? Or are you just afraid to overtax your brain with updated information?BTW, your Benghazi quip exposed your bias and and undermined your credibility.So, you are not familiar with Fail Safe. There was no nuclear holocaust. Apparently you're not familiar with sarcasm either.
Not for lack of trying.
The Rosenbergs made the Cold War possible.
That's a version I've never heard before. Are you sure it wasn't Franz Ferdinand?
I suppose you have a left wing academic revision of history for that one, too?
How about you tear yourself away from the Benghazi hearings and read some national news?
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/16/n...rand-jury-testimony-ethel-rosenberg.html?_r=0
If you're afraid of the NYTimes, there are several hundred other sources.
Neither would surprise me.
Oswald was a patsy, right?
Start a thread about Oswald if that's what you want to talk about. I've noticed no one in this thread, including the OP, wants to talk about Ethel Rosenberg. Just the usual kneejerk drivel. Not surprising.
She was convicted of espionage that led to the Cold War and she was executed.
Because executing the innocent is teh Amurican Way, right?
