Greg Mitchell's Blog, page 246

July 3, 1945: Trying to Halt Hiroshima and Nagasaki

On this date in 1945, the great atomic scientist Leo Szilard finished a letter that would become the strongest (virtually the only) real attempt at halting President Truman's march to using the atomic bomb--which was two weeks from its first test at Trinity--against Japanese cities.  Each summer I count down to the days to the tragedy marking events from 1945.  I've written hundreds of articles and  three books on the subject, Hiroshima in America (with Robert Jay Lifton), and more recently Atomic Cover-Up (on decades-long suppression of film shot in the atomic cities by the U.S. military) and Hollywood Bomb   (how an MGM 1947 drama was censored by the military and Truman himself).
*
It’s well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the great Leo Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”

The following day he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The bomb would be tested two weeks later and dropped over Hiroshima on August 6.

July 4, 1945

Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx,

Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.

It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan.

Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.

However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.

Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.

The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.
Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.

Leo Szilard

It’s well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the great Leo Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”
The following day he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The bomb would be tested two weeks later and dropped over Hiroshima on August 6. For more see my recent book Atomic Coverup and my book with Robert Jay Lifton, Hiroshima in America.
July 4, 1945
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx,
Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.
It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan. Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.
However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.
Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.
The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.
Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.
Leo Szilard
- See more at: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168725/... well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the great Leo Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”
The following day he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The bomb would be tested two weeks later and dropped over Hiroshima on August 6. For more see my recent book Atomic Coverup and my book with Robert Jay Lifton, Hiroshima in America.
July 4, 1945
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx,
Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.
It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan. Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.
However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.
Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.
The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.
Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.
Leo Szilard
- See more at: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168725/... well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the great Leo Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”
The following day he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The bomb would be tested two weeks later and dropped over Hiroshima on August 6. For more see my recent book Atomic Coverup and my book with Robert Jay Lifton, Hiroshima in America.
July 4, 1945
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx,
Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.
It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan. Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.
However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.
Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.
The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.
Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.
- See more at: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168725/... well known that as the Truman White House made plans to use the first atomic bombs against Japan in the summer of 1945, a large group of atomic scientists, many of whom had worked on the bomb project, raised their voices, or at least their names, in protest. They were led by the great Leo Szilard. On July 3, he finished a petition to the president for his fellow scientists to consider, which called atomic bombs “a means for the ruthless annihilation of cities.” It asked the president “to rule that the United States shall not, in the present phase of the war, resort to the use of atomic bombs.”
The following day he wrote this cover letter (below). The same day, Leslie Groves, military chief of the Manhattan Project, wrote Winston Churchill’s science advisor seeking advice on how to combat Szilard and his colleagues. The bomb would be tested two weeks later and dropped over Hiroshima on August 6. For more see my recent book Atomic Coverup and my book with Robert Jay Lifton, Hiroshima in America.
July 4, 1945
Dear xxxxxxxxxxxx,
Enclosed is the text of a petition which will be submitted to the President of the United States. As you will see, this petition is based on purely moral considerations.
It may very well be that the decision of the President whether or not to use atomic bombs in the war against Japan will largely be based on considerations of expediency. On the basis of expediency, many arguments could be put forward both for and against our use of atomic bombs against Japan. Such arguments could be considered only within the framework of a thorough analysis of the situation which will face the United States after this war and it was felt that no useful purpose would be served by considering arguments of expediency in a short petition.
However small the chance might be that our petition may influence the course of events, I personally feel that it would be a matter of importance if a large number of scientists who have worked in this field went clearly and unmistakably on record as to their opposition on moral grounds to the use of these bombs in the present phase of the war.
Many of us are inclined to say that individual Germans share the guilt for the acts which Germany committed during this war because they did not raise their voices in protest against these acts. Their defense that their protest would have been of no avail hardly seems acceptable even though these Germans could not have protests without running risks to life and liberty. We are in a position to raise our voices without incurring any such risks even though we might incur the displeasure of some of those who are at present in charge of controlling the work on “atomic power”.
The fact that the people of the people of the United States are unaware of the choice which faces us increases our responsibility in this matter since those who have worked on “atomic power” represent a sample of the population and they alone are in a position to form an opinion and declare their stand.
Anyone who might wish to go on record by signing the petition ought to have an opportunity to do so and, therefore, it would be appreciated if you could give every member of your group an opportunity for signing.
- See more at: http://www.thenation.com/blog/168725/...

Droning On

Biggest CIA drone strike in quite awhile yesterday in Pakistan, kills 16 alleged "militants" but as usual no way to check that out.   Pakistan condemns, also nothing new.  

The strike was only the second since the US president, Barack Obama, talked openly at the end of May about the programme for the first time. He vowed to tighten the rules governing drone strikes but warned that attacks would have to continue in Pakistan has long as US troops remained in Afghanistan.

Final Shot from a Hot Shot

NYT with piece on the 19 who died fighting the Arizona fire, including final text messages and photos--that's one below.  I'll recommend again one of great books of our era. Norman Mclean's Young Men and Fire. 

The Real Lone Ranger

With the opening of another stupid/silly summer bombshell, or bomb, The Lone Ranger,  here's Van Morrison from the great cult album Veedon Fleece, with "Who Was That Masked Man."  Ain't in lonely, livin' with a gun?

UPDATES: International Incident Over Snowden 'Escape' Heightens

UPDATE Wednesday 8:00 a.m.  Morales plane takes off with Vienna (this time surely without Snowden). Glenn Greenwald tweets:  "Austrian journalist tells me: Bolivia did not give permission to have Morales' plane searched, but airport policeman allowed to walk through." Some wonder if Snowden really was onboard?   Other South American nations furious about incident--especially since new evidence emerges that the plane might have really been low on fuel.   Oddly:  France and Spain deny refusing to let plane use their air space.  Julian Assange co-authors op-ed calling on EU nations to protect Snowden.   AP on Bolivia's UN ambassador:

Sacha Llorenti told reporters in Geneva on Wednesday that France, Portugal, Spain and Italy "violated international law" when they blocked President Evo Morales's plane that was returning from a trip to Moscow, based on suspicions NSA leaker Edward Snowden might be aboard.  "We interpret this as an aggression," and will ask the UN secretary general, Ban Ki-moon, to intervene, he said on Wednesday.

Meanwhile, Ecuador says it found hidden microphone at embassy where Assange is staying.

More from The Guardian.

[image error] UPDATE  9:15 p.m. Snowden not on plane.  Venezuela joins in condemning, saty Morales' life put at risk due to possibly running out of fuel.  White House with no comment on whether it ordered, refers journos to countries involved.  The Guardian with live-blog. NYT covers.  Remember when Obama last week said he wouldn't "scramble" any jets over this "hacker" Snowden?

Earlier:  Trying to catch up with this.  It seems that a plane carrying Bolivia's president Evo Morales was diverted tonight, refused permission to land, because of suspicions that Edward Snowden was board.  France and Portugal refused use of their air space.   Finally allowed to land in Spain for refueling, then on to Austria.  Bolivia calls it "a hostile act."  Morales had been meeting with Putin in Moscow.

International Incident Over Snowden 'Escape'?

UPDATE  9:15  Snowden not on plane.  Venezuela joins in condemning, saty Morales' life put at risk due to possibly running out of fuel.  White House with no comment on whether it ordered, refers journos to countries involved.  The Guardian with live-blog. NYT covers.  Remember when Obama last week said he wouldn't "scramble" any jets over this "hacker" Snowden?

Earlier:  Trying to catch up with this.  It seems that a plane carrying Bolivia's president Evo Morales was diverted tonight, refused permission to land, because of suspicions that Edward Snowden was board.  France and Portugal refused use of their air space.   Finally allowed to land in Spain for refueling, then on to Austria.  Bolivia calls it "a hostile act."  Morales had been meeting with Putin in Moscow.

Rockabilly Legends: The Early Daze

This alleged, unproven, to be the earliest known footage of four guys you might have heard of: Elvis P, Buddy H, Johnny C, and Carl P.   Read about it here.   That's Buddy on the soundtrack but footage is actually silent.  Where's Roy O?

Pete Best, Times 2

Wild NYT story coming this Sunday in the Magazine, just up online.  Guitarist (behind Cobain, left) who was kicked out of not only early Nirvana, but Soundgarden, too.  Then went on to be a war hero.  And more.  "What Everman did afterward put him far outside the category of rock’n’roll footnote. He became an elite member of the U.S. Army Special Forces, one of those bearded guys riding around on horseback in Afghanistan fighting the Taliban."

Marriage Offer to Save Snowden

Just popped up in my email, from a "Junior" in Brazil.  I guess I could send via snail mail to "Snowden, Moscow Airport, Russia."

Good afternoon, I am following the case with Edward Joseph Snowden, and I think I can help it, because I'm Brazilian, single. And I offer to marry him so he can live in Brazil. I do not know the legal effects in relation to this, but the marriage of persons of the same sex is permitted by the Federal Supreme Court and is accepted in all registries in Brazil principalemnte here in São Paulo capital. Just do not know of a legal form legal to do so and what gaps exist in the Brazilian constitution for this, because I offer to marry him. 

Rocket to Nowhere

Launch of Russian rocket rather fizzled today--leading a mushroom cloud at the end, thankfully not nuclear.  But toxic fumes threaten 70,000 nearby residents, who are advised to stay indoors.