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.
Pastimes : Kosovo -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?


To: JBL who wrote (8360)5/14/1999 2:56:00 AM
From: Douglas V. Fant  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 17770
 
JBL, Keep up the pressure on the slave traders of the National Islamic Front Government in the Sudan....

News Article by BOSTON GLOBE on May 13, 1999 at 17:47:04:

No wrong way to fight slavery

THE BOSTON GLOBE
Thursday, May 13, 1999
By Adrian Walker, Globe Columnist

You might think that a group dedicated to abolishing slavery in distant
corners of the world would win near-universal acclaim in 1999.

But for its efforts, a 6-year-old Somerville group is instead accused of
promoting slavery by the world's most celebrated humanitarian outfit, the
United Nations Children's Fund.

Working in concert with Christian Solidarity International, a Zurich-based
human rights group, the American Anti-Slavery Group purchases slaves in
the Sudan at about $50 a head and releases them into freedom.

To its supporters, the group's members are human rights heroes; to UNICEF
they are simplistic do-gooders seemingly oblivious to their role in
perpetuating bondage.

The group's front man is an escaped slave from Mauritania who lectures
church groups and students on the evils of modern-day slavery. The group
has also recently kicked off a high-powered advertising campaign, and has
the obligatory Web site (www.anti-slavery.org), on which it wages war with
its loudest and credible adversary, UNICEF.

The new ads resemble 19th century slave-era handbills, combining
historical authenticity with a slick veneer.

''In the Sudan,'' one announces, ''it's easier to buy a slave than a
VCR.''

Especially for children, such a polished sell job risks reducing slavery
to a road show: Moctar Tayeb, runaway slave, on tour.

But that's a quibble compared to the shocking endurance of the slave
trade. Estimates of the number of modern-day slaves vary wildly, both
because the areas where the practice survives are not exactly receptive to
clipboard-carrying census takers, and because there is some disagreement
on what constitutes slavery.

But best guesses place the number of Sudanese slaves in the tens of
thousands and the number of slaves in Mauritania (which on paper has
outlawed slavery three times, most recently in 1980) at anywhere from
200,000 to a million.

In the Sudan, the age-old slave trade has a modern twist: the on-again,
off-again 30-year civil war has created a domestic market, as Muslim
forces take Christian prisoners and make slaves of them.

The anti-slavery effort is simple: the American Anti-Slavery Group raises
money in the United States, and then representatives of Zurich Christian
Solidarity International travel to Sudanese villages, buy the slaves and
return them through the war zone to their homes and families. These trips
are not for the humanitarian hobbyist.

UNICEF, however, sees counterproductive meddling. The children whose
freedom is bought are returned to a war zone, UNICEF says, in which they
could easily become captives again in short order. UNICEF also argues that
freeing one slave at a time accomplishes little. And most important, in
UNICEF's view, the practice of going into the Sudan and buying slaves
endorses the moral legitimacy of slavery.

Charles Jacobs, the co-founder of the anti-slavery group, dismisses the
criticism. He argues that slavery is going on already, and there is no
evidence that his group's activities are promoting further trading.
UNICEF, he charges, criticizes his group, but has done almost nothing
itself to attack slavery. The American Anti-Slavery Group has at least
done something.

Jacobs does admit that his group has little idea of what has become of the
4,000 people it says it has freed. They may remain free; they may just as
well have been returned to bondage.

And, as UNICEF says, it is indeed hard to see how freeing one slave will
liberate thousands, or that buying slaves, even to emancipate them, does
not tacitly encourage slavery.

And yet. I am haunted by an image: one Sudanese child - just one - walking
the road to freedom, thanks to $50 in Western currency. He doesn't care
about geopolitics or debates over whether the ends justify the means. He
has something precious in a thoroughly oppressive land. For now, at least,
he is free.




To: JBL who wrote (8360)5/14/1999 8:42:00 AM
From: Neocon  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 17770
 
May 14, 1999
China Is Installing a Warhead Said to Be
Based on U.S. Secrets
By JAMES RISEN and JEFF GERTH
The New York Times

WASHINGTON -- China is close to deploying a nuclear missile with a
warhead whose design draws on stolen American secrets, United States
intelligence officials say.
A long-range Chinese missile, known as the Dong Feng-31, is being
equipped with a small nuclear warhead whose design uses secret American
technology, according to American intelligence assessments. The
technology is believed to have been stolen from a Government weapons
laboratory, although there is some debate over precisely what technical
information officials believe is being used.
According to the assessments, the missile is expected to be deployed
within three or four years, giving China what officials believe would be its
first warhead designed using secret American technology.
Since suspicions of Chinese nuclear espionage became public, the Clinton
Administration has said that there is no evidence that Beijing has actually
deployed nuclear weapons that rely on stolen American secrets.
Thursday night, the White House declined to comment on the assessments
of China's nuclear intentions.
Officials have said, for example, that China stole design information about
America's most advanced warhead, the W-88, between 1984 to 1988. Yet
they stress that while China has developed a test version with a similar
design, it has not actually produced such a weapon.
American officials believe that the technology suspected of having been
stolen for use in the DF-31's warhead will help China achieve its goal of
building a modern nuclear arsenal that relies on mobility to evade attacks.
The DF-31 will be a truck-based mobile missile that can be moved, thus
making it more difficult to detect and destroy.
China has denied allegations that it stole United States secrets, and insists
that its weapons are based on its own research and development.
China's nuclear arsenal is still much smaller and less technically advanced
than that of the United States. Yet the DF-31 and its new warhead
represent a step forward in China's efforts to present a more formidable
nuclear presence.
Officials say that also means China may soon be using secrets stolen from
the United States on weapons capable of a significant range that could
include Europe, Asia and possibly the western United States.
American intelligence assessments say the DF-31 will have a range of
approximately 5,000 miles. It is expected to be ready for deployment as
early as 2002 or 2003.
"The DF-31 ICBM will give China a major strike capability that will be
difficult to counterattack at any stage of its operation," a 1996 Air Force
intelligence report on the DF-31 stated. "It will be a significant threat not
only to U.S. forces deployed in the Pacific theater, but to portions of the
continental United States and to many of our allies."
Some United States officials say the new Chinese weapon will use design
technology from the American W-70 warhead, a small bomb designed at
the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory in California in the 1970's.
China stole secret design information about the W-70 from the lab in the
late 1970's or early 1980's, Government investigators believe. A scientist
was fired from Lawrence Livermore in 1981 in connection with the
investigation into the suspected theft, but no one has ever been arrested in
the case. The F.B.I. said it did not have evidence to bring charges in the
case.
The scientist involved in the suspected espionage has never been publicly
identified.
Some American officials believe that China used design information from
the "primary" of the W-70 to help develop the advanced warhead that will
be used on the DF-31 missile. The "primary" of a modern nuclear weapon
is a small atomic bomb that serves to ignite the "secondary," a larger
hydrogen bomb.
The W-70 warhead is also known as the neutron bomb, a weapon that kills
people with enhanced radiation while leaving buildings intact. But its
"primary" can be used in other nuclear weapons as well.
American officials have based their belief of Chinese reliance on American
design secrets for the new warhead in part on analyses of Chinese nuclear
tests in the late 1980's and early 1990's. Officials believe that those
successful tests were of a small warhead that is scheduled for use on the
DF-31.
Intelligence officials have also based their assessments on analyses of the
range and payload abilities of the DF-31.
Because the analyses are based partly on inferences, there is still a debate
under way within the American intelligence community over which
American nuclear secrets the Chinese are using. There is also disagreement
over the extent to which the DF-31's warhead will rely on American
technology, officials said.
"There is a debate over how much design information of ours they are
using," one official said. "This is a very sophisticated piece of equipment
that was difficult for us to develop, so we think it would be hard for them
to develop."
Despite the debate, the broad conclusion that the DF-31 will come
equipped with a warhead that uses stolen American technology is included
in two new secret Government reports, officials said.
Part of one report from a select House committee is soon to be made
public. The other report is the result of a Government-wide intelligence
assessment of the damage done to United States national security by
Chinese nuclear espionage, according to officials. That Government-wide
assessment, however, acknowledges the uncertainty.
An unclassified summary of the Government-wide intelligence assessment
released last month stated that "it is more likely that the Chinese used U.S.
design information to inform their own program than to replicate U.S.
weapons designs," in other words, used information to develop their own
projects rather than to merely copy American weapons.
The Congressional report does not name the specific warhead design
thought to have been stolen by China.
Some officials say that it was not until the Government-wide assessment
that many intelligence analysts began to draw connections between the
suspected theft of design secrets with the evidence gathered on the DF-31
and the continuing modernization of China's nuclear arsenal.
The DF-31, a solid-fuel missile, would be the first Chinese inter-continental
ballistic missile that would be moved on roads. China test-fired its rocket
motor last July, and the missile was scheduled to be flight-tested last
December, The Washington Times has reported.
Once the DF-31 and other advanced missiles are deployed, China is
expected to begin to phase out its older and less accurate ballistic missiles.
"The DF-31 ICBM will give China a major strike capability that will be
difficult to counterattack at any stage of its operation, from preflight
mobile operations through the terminal flight phase," the 1996 Air Force
intelligence report predicted.
The "road mobility" of the DF-31, the report adds, "will greatly improve
Chinese nuclear ballistic missile survivability and will complicate the task of
defeating the Chinese threat."

partners.nytimes.com
EutttnJu-KZOP

| |