babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics


Post New Topic  Post A Reply
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » right brain babble   » humanities & science   » Einstein and the G-men

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Einstein and the G-men
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 07 May 2002 02:44 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
He was the Elvis of science.

Women pursued him, celebrities sought him out, politicians courted him, and journalists followed him through the streets.

But, as Einstein was well aware, there was a darker posse on his trail. For many years, the Federal Bureau of Investigation and other agencies spied on him, acting on suspicions as disturbing as a tip that he had been a Russian spy in Berlin; as vague as an unease with his support of civil rights and pacifist and socialist causes; and as goofy as claims that he was working on a death ray or that he was heading a Communist conspiracy to take over Hollywood.


Fascinating stuff.

New Details Emerge from the Einstein Files

A particularly interesting little tidbit, I thought, was this:

quote:
One informer, however, clammed up and disappeared when the investigators asked for more information. Another turned out to be a convicted extortionist who had once organized antirelativity rallies in Berlin.

An antirelativity rally. What would such a thing be like, I wonder? Can you imagine the placard slogans?

"Einstein and Lorenz: Stalin's Useful Idiots!"

"C Isn't Constant, Space-Time Is!"

"If Time's Not Absolute, Nothing Is: Defend, Complete, Extend the Newtonian Revolution!"


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 07 May 2002 04:48 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
This caught (piqued?) my attention:
quote:
Mr. Jerome, a self-described "Red diaper baby" born and raised in New York City, is no stranger to the F.B.I. His father, a Communist Party official, was imprisoned for three years under the Smith Act, which made advocating the overthrow of the government a crime.

From the web:
quote:
1940, passed by the U.S. Congress as the Alien Registration Act of 1940. The act, which made it an offense to advocate or belong to a group that advocated the violent overthrow of the government, was the basis of later prosecutions of members of the Communist and Socialist Workers parties. In 1957 the U.S. Supreme Court restricted the application of the Smith Act to instances of active participation in, or verbal encouragement of, specific insurrectionary activities.

I don't get this at all. In the declaration of independence it is written:
quote:
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

What gives? Is the declaration of independence not a legal binding document?

From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 07 May 2002 05:08 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
It is not.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 07 May 2002 05:10 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
So the people who dwell on it are just cranks?

edited: I guess I mean to say that I'm sure I read something droning on about how the U.S. is one of the only countries in the world where armed revolt against the government is constitutional. And I'm pretty sure I read this in a reliable source and not some crank web site.

[ May 07, 2002: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 07 May 2002 05:11 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Interesting, isn't it.

When I was in the Steelworkers union, we had a little booklet of union bylaws, printed by the international union in Pittsburgh. Section Whatever-it-was prevented you from being an officer of the union if you were a member of any "Communist or Fascist organization" (I don't recall the exact wording; nor do I remember whether former members were similarly precluded).

This, I later learned, was a holdover from the early Cold War, when the AFL and CIO unions expelled their Communists and brought themselves into line with the Smith Act.

In our copies, incidentally, there were little typed stickers reading "Section Whatever-it-is is not applicable in British Columbia."


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
Victor Von Mediaboy
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 554

posted 07 May 2002 05:26 PM      Profile for Victor Von Mediaboy   Author's Homepage        Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
The declaration of independence is not a part of the US constitution.
From: A thread has merit only if I post to it. So sayeth VVMB! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 07 May 2002 05:27 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I know it's not apart of it, but I thought it was, like, a guiding principle or something.
From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 07 May 2002 06:30 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Looking for some material on the Declaration of Independence, I found this:

DECLARATION OF INDEPENDENCE
(for Modern Readers)

quote:
(Given the recent trend to modernize classic works of literature -- from the Bible, to The Canterbury Tales, to Shakespeare -- it seemed logical to modernize one of the great works of American literature: the Declaration of Independence. Jefferson and Co.'s affirmation of freedom and democracy is a wonderful document, but it simply doesn't speak to the current generation of TV-addicted zombies who wouldn't know a remote power from a remote control. With its archaic language and references to an unfamiliar, non-digital world, the D of I is sorely in need of an update to take it into the 21st Century. Hopefully this new version will be taught in our grade schools and civics classes, and a paper copy of it will replace the aging original now decomposing in the National Archives.)

[ May 07, 2002: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Arch Stanton
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2356

posted 07 May 2002 07:59 PM      Profile for Arch Stanton     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
An antirelativity rally. What would such a thing be like, I wonder?
Can you imagine the placard slogans?

Time is not relative. Time is money.

I see clock's keeping on his toes...


From: Borrioboola-Gha | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 07 May 2002 08:08 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
quote:
Time is not relative. Time is money.

But surely money's relative, yes? To the US dollar, typically? Therefore...

quote:
I see clock's keeping on his toes...

Speaking of which, according to Einstein, clock should run faster or slower, depending on the frame of reference, yes?


From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 07 May 2002 08:24 PM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Ouch, I can feel my brain shriveling up just thinking about this. I think I'm runinngg tttoooo ffffffffaaaaaaaaaassssssssssssssssssssssttttttttttttttttttttttttttttttt!
From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
'lance
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1064

posted 07 May 2002 08:38 PM      Profile for 'lance     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Fret not, good clockwork. Your brain may run slower, but its mass will increase, so you'll net out smarter.
From: that enchanted place on the top of the Forest | Registered: Jul 2001  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 07 May 2002 09:11 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
But wouldn't that give truth to the aphorism "smart like bowling ball, fast like dumptruck"?

quote:
But surely money's relative, yes? To the US dollar, typically? Therefore...

Money is also relative to itself, in that it falls in value from year to year.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SamL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2199

posted 07 May 2002 09:29 PM      Profile for SamL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 

From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Arch Stanton
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2356

posted 07 May 2002 09:36 PM      Profile for Arch Stanton     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
Just poot a letle sauce on it laddie.
From: Borrioboola-Gha | Registered: Mar 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 07 May 2002 10:15 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
SamL: Inflation is the fall in the value of money. Get it now?
From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
SamL
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2199

posted 07 May 2002 10:29 PM      Profile for SamL     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
I know, I know. It's just that my brain can only handle so many tasks at once.
From: Cambridge, MA | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
clockwork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 690

posted 08 May 2002 01:08 AM      Profile for clockwork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post  Reply With Quote 
One other thing I found interesting on my constitutional history lesson search was that two amendments (they weren't amendments per se, they were just stuck down from inclusion in the constitution at the time of ratification) were not included: one was that there should be no slavery in the States (struck down because of the protests of two southern states) and something else… I'm trying to find the sites I read this on, but I can't remember my search terms… errrrrr!

[ May 08, 2002: Message edited by: clockwork ]


From: Pokaroo! | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

Post New Topic  Post A Reply Close Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca