SI
SI
discoversearch

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor.  We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community.  If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.
Politics : Impeach George W. Bush -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: Peter Dierks who wrote (35047)6/30/2005 10:11:07 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
Chinese dragon awakens
By Bill Gertz
THE WASHINGTON TIMES
June 26, 2005
China is building its military forces faster than U.S. intelligence and military analysts expected, prompting fears that Beijing will attack Taiwan in the next two years, according to Pentagon officials.
U.S. defense and intelligence officials say all the signs point in one troubling direction: Beijing then will be forced to go to war with the United States, which has vowed to defend Taiwan against a Chinese attack.
China's military buildup includes an array of new high-technology weapons, such as warships, submarines, missiles and a maneuverable warhead designed to defeat U.S. missile defenses. Recent intelligence reports also show that China has stepped up military exercises involving amphibious assaults, viewed as another sign that it is preparing for an attack on Taiwan.
"There's a growing consensus that at some point in the mid-to-late '90s, there was a fundamental shift in the sophistication, breadth and re-sorting of Chinese defense planning," said Richard Lawless, a senior China-policy maker in the Pentagon. "And what we're seeing now is a manifestation of that change in the number of new systems that are being deployed, the sophistication of those systems and the interoperability of the systems."
China's economy has been growing at a rate of at least 10 percent for each of the past 10 years, providing the country's military with the needed funds for modernization.
The combination of a vibrant centralized economy, growing military and increasingly fervent nationalism has transformed China into what many defense officials view as a fascist state.
"We may be seeing in China the first true fascist society on the model of Nazi Germany, where you have this incredible resource base in a commercial economy with strong nationalism, which the military was able to reach into and ramp up incredible production," a senior defense official said.
For Pentagon officials, alarm bells have been going off for the past two years as China's military began rapidly building and buying new troop- and weapon-carrying ships and submarines.
The release of an official Chinese government report in December called the situation on the Taiwan Strait "grim" and said the country's military could "crush" Taiwan.
Earlier this year, Beijing passed an anti-secession law, a unilateral measure that upset the fragile political status quo across the Taiwan Strait. The law gives Chinese leaders a legal basis they previously did not have to conduct a military attack on Taiwan, U.S. officials said.
The war fears come despite the fact that China is hosting the Olympic Games in 2008 and, therefore, some officials say, would be reluctant to invoke the international condemnation that a military attack on Taiwan would cause.
Army of the future
In the past, some defense specialists insisted a Chinese attack on Taiwan would be a "million-man swim" across the Taiwan Strait because of the country's lack of troop-carrying ships.
"We left the million-man swim behind in about 1998, 1999," the senior Pentagon official said. "And in fact, what people are saying now, whether or not that construct was ever useful, is that it's a moot point, because in just amphibious lift alone, the Chinese are doubling or even quadrupling their capability on an annual basis."
Asked about a possible Chinese attack on Taiwan, the official put it bluntly: "In the '07-'08 time frame, a capability will be there that a year ago we would have said was very, very unlikely. We now assess that as being very likely to be there."
Air Force Gen. Paul V. Hester, head of the Pacific Air Forces, said the U.S. military has been watching China's military buildup but has found it difficult to penetrate Beijing's "veil" of secrecy over it.
While military modernization itself is not a major worry, "what does provide you a pause for interest and concern is the amount of modernization, the kind of modernization and the size of the modernization," he said during a recent breakfast meeting with reporters.
China is building capabilities such as aerial refueling and airborne warning and control aircraft that can be used for regional defense and long-range power projection, Gen. Hester said.
It also is developing a maneuverable re-entry vehicle, or MARV, for its nuclear warheads. The weapon is designed to counter U.S. strategic-missile defenses, according to officials who spoke on the condition of anonymity. The warhead would be used on China's new DF-31 long-range missiles and its new submarine missile, the JL-2.
Work being done on China's weapons and reconnaissance systems will give its military the capability to reach 1,000 miles into the sea, "which gives them the visibility on the movement of not only our airplanes in the air, but also our forces at sea," Gen. Hester said.
Beijing also has built a new tank for its large armed forces. It is known as the Type 99 and appears similar in design to Germany's Leopard 2 main battle tank. The tank is outfitted with new artillery, anti-aircraft and machine guns, advanced fire-control systems and improved engines.
The country's air power is growing through the purchase of new fighters from Russia, such as Su-30 fighter-bombers, as well as the development of its own fighter jets, such as the J-10.
Gen. Hester compared Chinese warplanes with those of the former Soviet Union, which were less capable than their U.S. counterparts, but still very deadly.
"They have great equipment. The fighters are very technologically advanced, and what we know about them gives us pause for concern against ours," he said.
Missiles also are a worry.
"It is their surface-to-air missiles, their [advanced] SAMs and their surface-to-surface missiles, and the precision, more importantly, of those surface-to-surface missiles that provide, obviously, the ability to pinpoint targets that we might have out in the region, or our friends and allies might have," Gen. Hester said.
The advances give the Chinese military "the ability ... to reach out and touch parts of the United States -- Guam, Hawaii and the mainland of the United States," he said.
To better deal with possible future conflicts in Asia, the Pentagon is modernizing U.S. military facilities on the Western Pacific island of Guam and planning to move more forces there.
The Air Force will regularly rotate Air Expeditionary Force units to Guam and also will station the new long-range unmanned aerial vehicle known as Global Hawk on the island, he said.
It also has stationed B-2 stealth bombers on Guam temporarily and is expected to deploy B-1 bombers there, in addition to the B-52s now deployed there, Gen. Hester said.

Projecting power
China's rulers have adopted what is known as the "two-island chain" strategy of extending control over large areas of the Pacific, covering inner and outer chains of islands stretching from Japan to Indonesia.
"Clearly, they are still influenced by this first and second island chain," the intelligence official said.
The official said China's buildup goes beyond what would be needed to fight a war against Taiwan.
The conclusion of this official is that China wants a "blue-water" navy capable of projecting power far beyond the two island chains.
"If you look at the technical capabilities of the weapons platforms that they're fielding, the sea-keeping capabilities, the size, sensors and weapons fit, this capability transcends the baseline that is required to deal with a Taiwan situation militarily," the intelligence official said.
"So they are positioned then, if [Taiwan is] resolved one way or the other, to really become a regional military power as well."
The dispatch of a Han-class submarine late last year to waters near Guam, Taiwan and Japan was an indication of the Chinese military's drive to expand its oceangoing capabilities, the officials said. The submarine surfaced in Japanese waters, triggering an emergency deployment of Japan's naval forces.
Beijing later issued an apology for the incursion, but the political damage was done. Within months, Japan began adopting a tougher political posture toward China in its defense policies and public statements. A recent Japanese government defense report called China a strategic national security concern. It was the first time China was named specifically in a Japanese defense report.

Energy supply a factor
For China, Taiwan is not the only issue behind the buildup of military forces. Beijing also is facing a major energy shortage that, according to one Pentagon study, could lead it to use military force to seize territory with oil and gas resources.
The report produced for the Office of Net Assessment, which conducts assessments of future threats, was made public in January and warned that China's need for oil, gas and other energy resources is driving the country toward becoming an expansionist power.
China "is looking not only to build a blue-water navy to control the sea lanes [from the Middle East], but also to develop undersea mines and missile capabilities to deter the potential disruption of its energy supplies from potential threats, including the U.S. Navy, especially in the case of a conflict with Taiwan," the report said.
The report said China believes the United States already controls the sea routes from the oil-rich Persian Gulf through the Malacca Strait. Chinese President Hu Jintao has called this strategic vulnerability to disrupted energy supplies Beijing's "Malacca Dilemma."
To prevent any disruption, China has adopted a "string of pearls" strategy that calls for both offensive and defensive measures stretching along the oil-shipment sea lanes from China's coast to the Middle East.
The "pearls" include the Chinese-financed seaport being built at Gwadar, on the coast of western Pakistan, and commercial and military efforts to establish bases or diplomatic ties in Bangladesh, Burma, Cambodia, Thailand and disputed islands in the South China Sea.
The report stated that China's ability to use these pearls for a "credible" military action is not certain.
Pentagon intelligence officials, however, say the rapid Chinese naval buildup includes the capability to project power to these sea lanes in the future.
"They are not doing a lot of surface patrols or any other kind of security evolutions that far afield," the intelligence official said. "There's no evidence of [Chinese military basing there] yet, but we do need to keep an eye toward that expansion."
The report also highlighted the vulnerability of China's oil and gas infrastructure to a crippling U.S. attack.
"The U.S. military could severely cripple Chinese resistance [during a conflict over Taiwan] by blocking its energy supply, whereas the [People's Liberation Army navy] poses little threat to United States' energy security," it said.
China views the United States as "a potential threat because of its military superiority, its willingness to disrupt China's energy imports, its perceived encirclement of China and its disposition toward manipulating international politics," the report said.

'Mercantilist measures'
The report stated that China will resort "to extreme, offensive and mercantilist measures when other strategies fail, to mitigate its vulnerabilities, such as seizing control of energy resources in neighboring states."
U.S. officials have said two likely targets for China are the Russian Far East, which has vast oil and gas deposits, and Southeast Asia, which also has oil and gas resources.
Michael Pillsbury, a former Pentagon official and specialist on China's military, said the internal U.S. government debate on the issue and excessive Chinese secrecy about its military buildup "has cost us 10 years to figure out what to do"
"Everybody is starting to acknowledge the hard facts," Mr. Pillsbury said. "The China military buildup has been accelerating since 1999. As the buildup has gotten worse, China is trying hard to mask it."
Richard Fisher, vice president of the International Assessment and Strategy Center, said that in 10 years, the Chinese army has shifted from a defensive force to an advanced military soon capable of operations ranging from space warfare to global non-nuclear cruise-missile strikes.
"Let's all wake up. The post-Cold War peace is over," Mr. Fisher said. "We are now in an arms race with a new superpower whose goal is to contain and overtake the United States."

China is stepping up its overt and covert efforts to gather intelligence and technology in the United States, and the activities have boosted Beijing's plans to rapidly produce advanced-weapons systems.
"I think you see it where something that would normally take 10 years to develop takes them two or three," said David Szady, chief of FBI counterintelligence operations.
He said the Chinese are prolific collectors of secrets and military-related information.
"What we're finding is that [the spying is] much more focused in certain areas than we ever thought, such as command and control and things of that sort," Mr. Szady said.
"In the military area, the rapid development of their 'blue-water' navy -- like the Aegis weapons systems -- in no small part is probably due to some of the research and development they were able to get from the United States," he said.
The danger of Chinese technology acquisition is that if the United States were called on to fight a war with China over the Republic of China (Taiwan), U.S. forces could find themselves battling a U.S.-equipped enemy.
"I would hate for my grandson to be killed with U.S. technology" in a war over Taiwan, senior FBI counterintelligence official Tim Bereznay told a conference earlier this year.
The Chinese intelligence services use a variety of methods to spy, including traditional intelligence operations targeting U.S. government agencies and defense contractors.

Additionally, the Chinese use hundreds of thousands of Chinese visitors, students and other nonprofessional spies to gather valuable data, most of it considered "open source," or unclassified information.
"What keeps us up late at night is the asymmetrical, unofficial presence," Mr. Szady said. "The official presence, too. I don't want to minimize that at all in what they are doing."
China's spies use as many as 3,200 front companies -- many run by groups linked to the Chinese military -- that are set up to covertly obtain information, equipment and technology, U.S. officials say.
Recent examples include front businesses in Milwaukee; Trenton, N.J.; and Palo Alto, Calif., Mr. Szady said.
In other cases, China has dispatched students, short-term visitors, businesspeople and scientific delegations with the objective of stealing technology and other secrets.
The Chinese "are very good at being where the information is," Mr. Szady said.
"If you build a submarine, no one is going to steal a submarine. But what they are looking for are the systems or materials or the designs or the batteries or the air conditioning or the things that make that thing tick," he said. "That's what they are very good at collecting, going after both the private sector, the industrial complexes, as well as the colleges and universities in collecting scientific developments that they need."
One recent case involved two Chinese students at the University of Pennsylvania who were found to be gathering nuclear submarine secrets and passing them to their father in China, a senior military officer involved in that country's submarine program.
Bit by bit
To counter such incidents, the FBI has been beefing up its counterintelligence operations in the past three years and has special sections in all 56 field offices across the country for counterspying.
But the problem of Chinese spying is daunting.
"It's pervasive," Mr. Szady said. "It's a massive presence, 150,000 students, 300,000 delegations in the New York area. That's not counting the rest of the United States, probably 700,000 visitors a year. They're very good at exchanges and business deals, and they're persistent."
Chinese intelligence and business spies will go after a certain technology, and they eventually get what they want, even after being thwarted, he said.
Paul D. Moore, a former FBI intelligence specialist on China, said the Chinese use a variety of methods to get small pieces of information through numerous collectors, mostly from open, public sources.
The three main Chinese government units that run intelligence operations are the Ministry of State Security, the military intelligence department of the People's Liberation Army and a small group known as the Liaison Office of the General Political Department of the Chinese army, said Mr. Moore, now with the private Centre for Counterintelligence Studies.
China gleans most of its important information not from spies but from unwitting American visitors to China -- from both the U.S. government and the private sector -- who are "serially indiscreet" in disclosing information sought by Beijing, Mr. Moore said in a recent speech.
In the past several years, U.S. nuclear laboratory scientists were fooled into providing Chinese scientists with important weapons information during discussions in China through a process of information elicitation -- asking questions and seeking help with physics "problems" that the Chinese are trying to solve, he said.
"The model that China has for its intelligence, in general, is to collect a small amount of information from a large amount of people," Mr. Moore said during a conference of security specialists held by the National Security Institute, a Massachusetts-based consulting firm.

In the learning phase
Mr. Szady acknowledges that the FBI is still "figuring out" the methods used by the Chinese to acquire intelligence and technology from the United States.
Since 1985, there have been only six major intelligence defectors from China's spy services, and information about Chinese activities and methods is limited, U.S. officials said.
Recent Chinese spy cases were mired in controversy.
The case against Katrina Leung, a Los Angeles-based FBI informant who the FBI thinks was a spy for Beijing, ended in the dismissal of charges of taking classified documents from her FBI handler. The Justice Department is appealing the case.
The case against Los Alamos National Laboratory scientist Wen Ho Lee, who was suspected of supplying classified nuclear-weapons data to China, ended with Mr. Lee pleading guilty to only one count among the 59 filed.
The FBI has been unable to find out who in the U.S. government supplied China with secrets on every deployed nuclear weapon in the U.S. arsenal, including the W-88, the small warhead used on U.S. submarine-launched nuclear missiles.
"I think the problem is huge, and it's something that I think we're just getting our arms around," Mr. Szady said of Chinese spying. "It's been there, and what we're doing is more or less discovering it or figuring it out at this point."
Mr. Bereznay said recently that Chinese intelligence activities are a major worry. FBI counterintelligence against the Chinese "is our main priority," he said.
In some cases, so-called political correctness can interfere with FBI counterspying. For example, Chinese-American scientists at U.S. weapons laboratories have accused the FBI of racial profiling.
But Mr. Szady said that is not the case.
China uses ethnic Chinese-Americans as a base from which to recruit agents, he said.
"They don't consider anyone to be American-Chinese," Mr. Szady said. "They're all considered overseas Chinese."
So the answer he gives to those who accuse the FBI of racial profiling is: "We're not profiling you. The Chinese are, and they're very good at doing that."

Pushing an agenda
China's government also uses influence operations designed to advance pro-Chinese policies in the United States and to prevent the U.S. government from taking tough action or adopting policies against Beijing's interests, FBI officials said.
Rudy Guerin, a senior FBI counterintelligence official in charge of China affairs, said the Chinese aggressively exploit their connections to U.S. corporations doing business in China.
"They go straight to the companies themselves," he said.
Many U.S. firms doing business in China, including such giants as Coca-Cola, Boeing and General Motors, use their lobbyists on behalf of Beijing.
"We see the Chinese going to these companies to ask them to lobby on their behalf on certain issues," Mr. Guerin said, "whether it's most-favored-nation trade status, [World Health Organization], Falun Gong or other matters."
The Chinese government also appeals directly to members of Congress and congressional staff.
U.S. officials revealed that China's embassy in Washington has expanded a special section in charge of running influence operations, primarily targeting Congress.
The operation, which includes 26 political officers, is led by Su Ge, a Chinese government official.
The office frequently sends out e-mail to selected members or staff on Capitol Hill, agitating for or against several issues, often related to Taiwan affairs.
Nu Qingbao, one of Mr. Su's deputies, has sent several e-mails to select members and staff warning Congress not to support Taiwan.
The e-mails have angered Republicans who view the influence operations as communist meddling.
"The Chinese, like every other intelligence agency or any other government, are very much engaged in trying to influence, both covertly and overtly," Mr. Szady said.

Taking technology
The real danger to the United States is the loss of the high-technology edge, which can impair U.S. competitiveness but more importantly can boost China's military.
Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), a part of the Department of Homeland Security, is concerned because the number of high-profile cases of illegal Chinese technology acquisition is growing.
"We see a lot of activity involving China, and I think it would be fair to say the trend is toward an increase," said Robert A. Schoch, deputy assistant director in ICE's national security investigations division.
Mr. Schoch said that one recent case of a South Korean businessman who sought to sell advanced night-vision equipment to China highlights the problem.
"We have an awesome responsibility to protect this sensitive technology," he said. "That gives the military such an advantage."
ICE agents are trying hard to stop illegal exports to China and several other states, including Iran and Syria, not just by halting individual exports but by shutting down networks of illegal exporters, Mr. Schoch said.
Another concern is that China is a known arms proliferator, so weapons and related technology that are smuggled there can be sent to other states of concern.
"Yes, some of this stuff may go to China, but then it could be diverted to other countries," Mr. Schoch said. "And that is the secondary proliferation. Who knows where it may end up."
As with China's military buildup, China's drive for advanced technology with military applications has been underestimated by the U.S. intelligence community.
A report prepared for the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission found predictions that China was unable to advance technologically were false.
In fact, the report by former Pentagon official Michael Pillsbury highlights 16 key advances in Chinese technology -- all with military implications -- in the past six months alone.
The failure to gauge China's development is part of the bias within the U.S. government that calls for playing down the threat from the growing power of China, both militarily and technologically, Mr. Pillsbury stated.
"Predictions a decade ago of slow Chinese [science and technology] progress have now proved to be false," the report stated.
Unlike the United States, China does not distinguish between civilian and military development. The same factories in China that make refrigerators also are used to make long-range ballistic missiles.
At a time when U.S. counterintelligence agencies are facing an array of foreign spies, the Chinese are considered the most effective at stealing secrets and know-how.
"I think the Chinese have figured it out, as far as being able to collect and advance their political, economic and military interests by theft or whatever you want to call it," Mr. Szady said. "They are way ahead of what the Russians have ever done."



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (35047)6/30/2005 10:18:49 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
From the Gertz article above:

‘There's a growing consensus that at some point in the mid-to-late '90s, there was a fundamental shift in the sophistication, breadth and re-sorting of Chinese defense planning,’ said Richard Lawless, a senior China-policy maker in the Pentagon. ‘And what we're seeing now is a manifestation of that change in the number of new systems that are being deployed, the sophistication of those systems and the interoperability of the systems.’

Well, I’ll be damned if the above paragraph doesn’t outline the lethal nature of the real Clinton legacy.
Let’s review what we already know, but may occasionally need to be reminded of:
A U.S. State Department document released in early 2002 proved that during the years 1993 to 2000 the most successful Chinese espionage operation in history occurred. The document revealed that Hughes Space and Communications Company violated U.S. national security no fewer than 120 times by deliberately sending sensitive missile and satellite technology directly to the Chinese army. And at no time did Hughes seek or receive a license or other written government approval from the appropriate legal sources to provide sensitive military technology to our militaristic ideological enemy.
Chinese General Shen Rongjun (a leader in the Chinese Army’s Commission on Science, Technology and Industry for National Defense) led the infiltration of U.S. missile and satellite technology during the Clinton administration. General Shen was directly involved in the transfer of technology from Hughes to Chinese operatives, and the Clinton Administration not only turned the other way, but most probably played a large part in engineering the transfer.
Because of then Secretary of State Warren Christopher’s concern that Hughes might be selling sensitive missile and satellite technology to China, and because a State Department license was necessary in order to affect such a transfer, Clinton, ignoring vehement opposition from the Defense Department, the CIA, and the National Security Agency, transferred the power to issue those licenses to the Commerce Department, headed by (the now ‘unfortunately’ deceased) Ron Brown.
The bulk of the huge transfer of sensitive technology occurred immediately after General Shen met one-on-one with Brown in Beijing. (An aside: when Brown was head of the DNC, his committee was fined for ‘knowingly and willingly’ accepting donations from Chinese sources.)
Another all-too-familiar aside: Brown’s funeral was the tragedy that inspired the President’s instantaneous laughter/tears performance that will go down in history as the captured-on-film hypocrisy of the century.
General Shen promised satellite contracts to Hughes if technology transfers continued, and Hughes CEO Michael Armstrong did some arm-twisting in order to be able to accede to Shen’s demands. He threatened to withdraw his significant financial support in the upcoming presidential campaign if Clinton did not see to it that a waiver was issued for the transfers. The waiver was indeed issued and enormous amounts of detailed satellite encryption were summarily handed over to China.
Similar circumventing of legal channels for the transfer of missile guidance and satellite technology occurred in technology transfers from Loral Corporation to the Chinese.
Interesting factoid: Bernard Schwartz, the chairman of Loral, was the largest individual contributor to the democrat party in 1997.
Clinton's transfer allowed the Chinese army to acquire advanced U.S. satellite and missile technology for military purposes. Hughes satellites provided the Chinese army with secure communications that are virtually invincible in ground combat and provide extraordinarily accurate navigation for strike bombers and missiles. Hughes also provided the PLA with advanced technology that is essential for the design and manufacture of missile control systems and missile nose cones. The transfers from Hughes allowed China to develop a new generation of ICBMs that, without the help of the Clinton administration, would have taken China a decade or more to develop on its own. (Excerpt from the article at the head of this thread: ‘It is their surface-to-air missiles, their [advanced] SAMs and their surface-to-surface missiles, and the precision, more importantly, of those surface-to-surface missiles that provide, obviously, the ability to pinpoint targets that we might have out in the region, or our friends and allies might have.’)
In 1994, under similar circumstances, sensitive machine tools from an Ohio McDonnell Douglas high-tech factory – machine tools that had been used to make ICBMs and to build B-1, C-17, and F-15 aircraft (excerpt from the article at the head of this thread: ‘They have great equipment. The fighters are very technologically advanced, and what we know about them gives us pause for concern against ours.’) -- wound up in a Chinese factory that is known to produce Silkworm missiles. Just as occurred with the Hughes technology, the export of these sensitive machine tools required a government-issued export license. And, just as occurred with the Hughes technology, the licensing process was circumvented due to pressures from within the Clinton administration.
The Clinton administration also relaxed controls on the export of U.S. supercomputers. No efforts have been made to verify whether any of the forty-plus supercomputers that have been exported to China are being used in nuclear weapons work.
President Clinton also turned a blind eye to China’s actual theft of sensitive W-88 miniaturization nuclear warhead technology. And possession of this once uniquely American technology now allows China to affix up to ten nuclear warheads on a single missile, with each of the ten aimed at a different target. The W-88 warhead is light compared to other nuclear warheads, but its power is more than ten times that of the bomb dropped on Hiroshima.
Interesting factoid: five Chinese satellite launches (a few of which Loral was partnered in) failed between Sept of 1991 and August of 1996. As of August of 1998, many more have been lauched ... and none have failed.
Clinton hosted more than a hundred fundraising dinners in the White House in which he solicited, and received, huge financial contributions from our ideological enemies – with China sitting highest on that infamous list of foreign political supporters. Of course the acceptance of such campaign contributions is a federal crime. But the financial illegality of the Clinton strategy pales in comparison to the resulting threat to our national sovereignty – and to our very existence.
So, as a result of Clinton’s overriding normal State/Intelligence/Pentagon procedures, a series of illicit export control waivers were issued that allowed his top campaign donors to sell sensitive missile and satellite technology to China – technology that would result in this country being placed in the most precarious position in its history.
As if that weren’t treason enough, Mr. Clinton was simultaneously roadblocking the deployment of an American missile defense system, leaving us vulnerable to the very ICBMs that he was helping our enemies produce. American military manpower, materiel, and equipment (especially ships and aircraft) were also cut by roughly one-half during the eight years of the Clinton administration.
Also, on countless occasions, Mr. Clinton refused to impose sanctions on Beijing when intelligence discovered that it was sharing sensitive military technologies, most likely pilfered from America, with the terrorist states of North Korea, Iran and Pakistan.
Clinton was very successful in hiding both the results of his illegal waivers and the growing long-range missile threat to our safety and security … until 1998, when our illustrious president assured us that North Korea didn’t have ballistic missile capabilities … and only days later North Korea launched a missile over Japan that came down off the coast of Alaska.
A direct 1998 quote from the venerable Senator James Inhofe (R-OK): ‘ … It is apparent that the ongoing cover-up of China’s theft of nuclear secrets is one of the greatest national security scandals in American history. Secret files on virtually every technology used in the design of our nuclear arsenal have been compromised … [and] it is factual to say that President Clinton knew he was giving our missile technology to North Korea as well as to China.’
Also included in the technology transfer to China during the Clinton administration:
(1) five decades of information garnered from nuclear testing
(2) detailed data related to the design, use and power of nuclear warheads such as the W-56, W-62, W-76, W-87 -- for MX land-based missiles -- and W-88 -- for Trident submarine-based missiles
(3) sensitive details about the neutron bomb
(4) sensitive details about EMP (electromagnetic pulse) weapons
(5) manufacturing specifications for re-entry vehicles (excerpt from the article at the head of this thread: ‘[China is] also is developing a maneuverable re-entry vehicle, or MARV, for its nuclear warheads. The weapon is designed to counter U.S. strategic-missile defenses.’)
(6) space radar capabilities
(7) computer programs that simulate nuclear tests
Today we are aware that China has at least twenty ICBMs aimed at American cities, and many Pentagon and Intelligence Department officials firmly believe that they are ready to launch them, should we attempt to come to the defense of Taiwan when China seeks to re-absorb that island sometime in the next two years.
The sad and frightening fact is that now, in 2005, as a result of the treasons of 1993-2000, the power and technological advantage enjoyed by the Chinese is probably, in large part, the result of (bartered for political support) research reports, design specifications, computer models and hi-tech machinery provided by the United States. And, when we are called upon – most likely within the next two years – to defend Taiwan, we will find ourselves confronting an enemy largely armed to the teeth by one of our own Presidents.
Our men will die, our weaponry and equipment will be blown up, and freedom-loving nations will find themselves facing an ominous predator unlike any the world has ever known … in large part because of William Jefferson Clinton’s thirst for power, allegiance to a leftist political agenda … and obsessive desire to manufacture a personal legacy.
A related aside: Many political observers believe that Hillary Clinton is the front runner to win the democrat nomination for president in 2008. Nothing (other than perhaps events of an illicit sexual nature) occurred in the White House in 1993-2000 without Ms. Clinton’s knowledge, and possibly not even without her consent.
Should now-Senator Clinton ascend to the presidency in 2009, if China has not yet attempted to re-annex Taiwan by then, that island nation will find itself the (former) ally of a nation whose administration is significantly less willing to come to its defense than the current administration.



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (35047)7/3/2005 12:21:41 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 93284
 
The Melody Townsel Gambit and the SCOTUS Nominee
hughhewitt.com, July 2, 2005

Remember Melody Townsel? She made a charge against John Bolton which was disseminated via Kos to the blogs of the left and then into MSM. Townsel was discredited, but she bled Bolton a bit.

As I discussed in the post below, the left will use the "return of Lochner" rhetoric as a smokescreen for its real strategy for defeating a nominee, which is the Townsel Gambit times a hundred. The nominee can expect the left, harnassing the energy and fanaticism of MoveOn.org etc and using the technology of the web, to identify, canvass and interview every member of the nominee's high school, college and law school classes, plus associates at law firms and past clients as well as lawyers who have appeared before the nominee's court. The close family and extended family of the nominee and spouse will get the same going-over. I wouldn't be surprised if we hear from "friends" of the nominee's younger sibling, or a first year associate or summer clerk in the nominee's former law firm the year the nominee left for the bench. Of course every former government associate will also be a potential mark. And every conference the nominee attended will be analyzed for potential witnesses who will place the nominee in a bar with a stranger.

In short, this is going to be very ugly because the left will commit itself to winning at any cost, and if it takes a dozen Melody Townsels peddling two dozen slanders each, then that is what they will try.

Expect as well the demand for documents that cannot be produced or will not be produced under long standing precedents. That will not succeed in and of itself, but again delay will be the objective until the willing witnesses are found and coached. Like Bush's DUI in the 2000 campaign, the biggest charge of all will drop just as the hearings come to a close, with the left hoping to force another round of hearings as happened with Justice Thomas.

The best defense here starts with the combination of a thoroughly scrubbed nominee and vigilance of new media on the center right and perhaps even skepticism of legacy media of sensational charges (unlikely). The key, though, will be speed. Senators Frist and Specter need to establish a schedule, stick to it, and alert the public from day one that a filibuster will be met with the constitutional option after 100 hours of debate following the conclusion of the hearings. The longer the process drags on, the greater the chance to invent and deploy Townsels. The more specific the schedule and the notice on the constitutional option, the greater the attention of the public and the scrutiny of would-be Anita Hills.

It would also be useful to start reminding people that there have been more than 300 recess appointments of judges in the country's history, beginning with George Washington, and including appointments to the Supreme Court. Eisenhower used recess appointments to put Chief Justice Warren, and Justices Brennan and Stewart on the bench. If the Senate gets roiled by procedural obstructionism, President Bush should be prepared to place his nominee on the court and allow the process to catch up with the new Justice sometime before the end of 2006.



To: Peter Dierks who wrote (35047)7/3/2005 12:26:29 AM
From: paret  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 93284
 
Saudi Arabia - Conversion by a Muslim to another religion is punishable by death. Bibles are illegal.

Yemen - Bans proselytizing by non-Muslims and forbids conversions. The Government does not allow the building of new non-Muslim places of worship

Kuwait - Registration and licensing of religious groups. Members of religions not sanctioned in the Koran may not build places of worship. Prohibits organized religious education for religions other than Islam

Egypt -Islam is the official state religion and primary source of legislation. Accordingly, religious practices that conflict with Islamic law are prohibited. Muslims may face legal problems if they convert to another faith. Requires non-Muslims to obtain what is now a presidential decree to build a place of worship

Algeria - The law prohibits public assembly for purposes of practicing a faith other than Islam. Non-Islamic proselytizing is illegal, and the Government restricts the importation of non-Islamic literature for distribution.

(All information is from US State Department Human Rights Reports)