The Unknown Jew Who Risked the Electric Chair To Save the Globe From American Nuclear Tyranny

His name was Theodore (Ted) Alvin Hall (changed from “Holtzman” to escape American anti-Semitism, by the way).

From Wikipedia:

Hall later claimed that as it became clear in the summer of 1944 that Germany was losing the war and would not ever manage to develop an atomic bomb, he became concerned about the consequences of an American monopoly on atomic weapons once the war ended. He was especially worried about the possibility of the emergence of a fascist government in the United States, should it have such a nuclear monopoly and want to keep it that way.

In a written statement published in 1997, Hall came very close to admitting that the Soviet spy cable identifying him as a Soviet asset was accurate, although obliquely, saying that in the immediate postwar years, he felt strongly that “an American monopoly” on nuclear weapons “was dangerous and should be avoided:”

To help prevent that monopoly I contemplated a brief encounter with a Soviet agent, just to inform them of the existence of the A-bomb project. I anticipated a very limited contact. With any luck, it might easily have turned out that way, but it was not to be.

A year before his death, he gave a more direct confession in an interview for the TV-series Cold War on CNN in 1998, saying:

I decided to give atomic secrets to the Russians because it seemed to me that it was important that there should be no monopoly, which could turn one nation into a menace and turn it loose on the world as … Nazi Germany developed. There seemed to be only one answer to what one should do. The right thing to do was to act to break the American monopoly.

From The Guardian:

Hall had earlier told the authors of the book Bombshell: “Maybe the course of history, if unchanged, could have led to atomic war in the past 50 years; for example, the bomb might have been dropped on China in 1949 or the early 1950s. Well, if I helped to prevent that, I accept the charge.”

Well said!

Learn further details here…

Of course, he never should have helped create The Bomb in the first place!

Russia, Too, Could Have Been ‘Exceptional’. Just Like America!

Quoting Ron Unz:

Consider the fascinating perspective of the recently deceased Boris Berezovsky, once the most powerful of the Russian oligarchs and the puppet master behind President Boris Yeltsin during the late 1990s. After looting billions in national wealth and elevating Vladimir Putin to the presidency, he overreached himself and eventually went into exile. According to the New York Times, he had planned to transform Russia into a fake two-party state—one social-democratic and one neoconservative—in which heated public battles would be fought on divisive, symbolic issues, while behind the scenes both parties would actually be controlled by the same ruling elites. With the citizenry thus permanently divided and popular dissatisfaction safely channeled into meaningless dead-ends, Russia’s rulers could maintain unlimited wealth and power for themselves, with little threat to their reign. Given America’s history over the last couple of decades, perhaps we can guess where Berezovsky got his idea for such a clever political scheme.

(Find the original NYT article here.)

If only V. Putin had agreed…

Ah, if only. Just picture it:

To quote Hyehudi Editor

“If voting changed anything, they’d make it illegal.” Remember these words, and you’ll never sweat an election.

As the famous poem goes about the road not taken (I MAY be misremembering here…):

“I took the one less traveled by,

And that has made absolutely no difference.”

Welcoming Event for New American Chareidi Kehillah of Olim: Kehillas Chazon Elimelech of Afula

Come meet with them here in Yerushalayim, welcome them to Eretz Yisroel, and be mechazek them for hatzlacha in their endeavor.
Rabbonim will speak, and refreshments served.
Ezras Nashim open.
Monday evening, Motza’ei Zos Chanukah (Dec. 26), at the Yeshivas Chofetz Chaim hall, Sanhedria Murchevet 6:00 p.m. – 8:45 p.m.
For more info: Yoel Berman 053-319-1618 / yberman613@gmail.com


Yoel Berman 053-3191618 יואל ברמן
***
אגודת קדושת ציון – דרישת ציון על טהרת הקודש
מתחברים למשמעות התורנית המעשית של ארץ ישראל בימינו

מנא להו? – מהו מקור חכמתם של האומות ועיון בדעה שמייחסת את מקור חכמתם לעמנו

Mada.Hazal@Gmail.com

אמיתי אביגדור ©

לקרוא \ להוריד את הספר כאן…

עוד לא עיינתי כ”כ (אין כוחי \ לבי במדעים), אבל המודעות הממוסגרות לקורא מסקרנות מאד.

הודעה ראשונה:

מאמר זה לא נועד לכל אדם. מי שחונך והורגל כל ימיו באמונה תמימה, ומסקנות השונות מהשקפתו יעוררו בו קשיים באמונה – עליו להימנע מלימוד מאמר זה, שכן עדיפה אמונה שאינה מושלמת, מאשר קשיים מושלמים.

עם זאת, דבר פשוט וברור הוא, שגם על אדם כזה חובה לדעת שהבנתו אינה מושלמת בנושא, וקל וחומר שהיא אינה הדעה היחידה, ולא שייך שדווקא הוא יזלזל באלו שמעמיקים לבירור האמת.

הודעה שניה:

דבר ברור הוא שלימוד נושא שכזה מצריך זהירות גדולה, להבדיל בין הקודש ובין החול, ואפילו כמלא שערה. וככל שהאדם מעמיק יותר, עליו להיזהר יותר, שיוסיף דעת יוסיף מכאוב.

עם זאת, מי שראוי לכך, בוודאי עליו לברר את האמת, ודווקא בירור האמת הוא שמביא לאמונה אמיתית, וכדברי הזוהר “לית אמונה בלא אמת” (ח”ג דף קצח:).

ועל כולן אמר רבן יוחנן בן זכאי: אוי לי אם אומר, אוי לי אם לא אומר. אם אומר – שמא ילמדו וכו’, ואם לא אומר – שמא יאמרו וכו’ אין תלמידי חכמים בקיאין וכו’ (בבא בתרא פט: לעניין מיני עוולות במקח וממכר).

לקרוא \ להוריד את הספר מפורטל הדף היומי כאן…

End Road Socialism Now and Save Tens of Thousands of Lives!

40,000 Traffic Fatalities a Year Is Not Acceptable. So Why Do We Accept It Year After Year?

US highway authorities are bemoaning the recent increase in highway fatalities. And, well, they should. With an annual death rate of 40,000 per year on our nations’ roads and streets, the situation is—to say the least—highly regrettable.

Like good bureaucrats, these folks do not intend to stand idly by and do nothing about this scourge. Instead, they intend to implement a myriad of policies tried in the past—which have failed.

For example, the US Department of Transportation shall be addressing “issues ranging from speed limits to emergency medical care.” But this is merely the tip of the iceberg. They shall also be improving “street lighting” and “reducing alcohol-impaired driving.”

Nor does this complete their to-do list. There is also “stricter enforcement of speed limits, seatbelt mandates and drunken-driving laws; better designed roads, especially in poorer neighborhoods; more public transit; and further spread of safety features like automated braking.”

Never fear, Pete Buttigieg, the transportation secretary, is on the job.

“We’ve got to look at what’s working and lift up those communities and those jurisdictions that are doing the best job, in addition to finding measures and performance expectations that will hold those accountable who haven’t been keeping up,” says Buttigieg.

Hey, don’t knock this. None of these nostrums have ever been tried before. Surely, this time, they will work!

Let us sit back and take a deep breath on this matter.

Suppose there was a meeting of the USSR central planning bureau, agricultural division. They were bewailing the poor quantity and quality of produce on the nation’s farms. They resolved to use better crop rotation, more fertilizer, leaving lands idle once every seven years in order to improve fertility, the importation of new varieties of products, better extermination of pests, more and improved tractors, education for the farm workers, and such.

Now suppose someone burst into these deliberations and said the following: “But we’ve already tried all these things. Every last one of them. We’re still in the same pickle. Have we not learned anything from the fact that our collectivized farms comprise 97% of the acreage of country, and grow 75% of the crops, while from the farm workers’ private gardens emanate 25% of the crops, on land amounting to 3% of the total? Let us privatize all Russian farms!”

Undoubtedly, in the USSR such an interloper would have been summarily shot.

I hope and trust this fate will not befall me since I advocate that very same solution for our nation’s highways. Privatize ‘em all.

Although I will not of course be shot for saying this, the same level of incredulity is likely to greet my suggestion, as would have been the reaction to this hypothetical free-enterprise Soviet economist.

People will say, well, you can indeed privatize agricultural land, but highways and streets are another kettle of fish. It simply cannot be done! They are a natural public good. (This latter bit of invincible ignorance means they were mistaught introductory microeconomics.)

Wrong. The first private roads date back to England, before the 10th century. During revolutionary times in the US many streets were private post roads. They would charge fees based upon the number of horses and axels in those dirt road days. They even based charges on width of wheels; narrow—think ice skates which put ruts in the road—cost more; wide—think steam rollers which flattened it out—less.

Of course we need to reduce drunk driving, driver inattention, speeding, vehicle breakdowns, etc. But we need private managers to do so, in competition with one another. Have we not yet learned the economic aphorism that competition tends to create a better product at a lower cost? Who says that one set of rules for the entire nation, emanating from Washington DC is the best way to approach this or any other problem? Maybe what should be addressed is not only the level of speed, but its variance? Perhaps each lane should have its own speed limit, not a minimum of 40 and a maximum of 70 all throughout. We must think outside the box if we are to make any progress in making driving safer.

How long will we have to wait to even seriously contemplate the privatization of this important aspect of our economy? Do we as a society want to radically reduce these horrendous traffic fatality statistics, or don’t we? If so, it behooves us to think radically, not in the same old tired ruts.

From LRC, here.