Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: midnight Target on June 03, 2005, 03:03:12 PM
-
Could one of you Clinton haters show me the evidence that Clinton sold us out to China for campaign contributions. Sure would like to see it.
-
was it clinton or al gore that got campaign contributions from china? i forgot.
-
Here's some links from the 'New American'.. interesting reading. Use caution tho.. the rag seems to have a bit of a slant. ;)
ChinaGate (http://www.thenewamerican.com/focus/chinagate/)
-
Midnight Target,
While I'm not in the business of hating anyone except "the serpent of old" there is a lot available on this subject, so it is difficult to know what to offer up. Here is imho one of the best synopses of the situation available online that presents most of the facts. The full report is too long for this board, so you can grab the rest at: Partners in Crime (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37916657174c.htm)
Partners In Crime
New evidence shows the link that Republicans and Democrats have long ignored: between reckless transfers of defense technology to Communist China and campaign donations to Clinton-Gore.
Kenneth R. Timmerman
The American Spectator
August,1999
New evidence shows conclusively for the first time that the Chinese government's effort to buy political influence in the United States led to concrete decisions by the Clinton administration that have harmed our national security. Uncovered by U.S. government investigators and aired publicly by Rep. Curt Weldon (R-Penn.), the evidence includes bank transfer documents making it possible to trace specific campaign contributions back to Chinese military intelligence; corporate documents for Chinese front companies; and transcripts of secret conversations between a Chinese intelligence operative and campaign donor Johnny Chung, which detail a cover- up scheme allegedly agreed upon by President Clinton and Chinese President Jiang Zemin. "This is the first time in U.S. history that an American president has been compromised by a foreign intelligence service," one U.S. government official involved in the investigation told TAS.
Weldon, one of five Republicans on the bipartisan Cox Committee that examined the high-tech giveaway to Communist China, charged that Clinton administration efforts to liberalize U.S. export controls led to "the wholesale auction of sensitive American technology to the highest bidder," and that these decisions came about "because people could buy influence and make campaign contributions." Unveiled at a press conference on May 27 that was ignored by the mainstream press, Weldon's charges were buttressed with new documents establishing key linkages between the Chinese companies used to funnel campaign contributions to the Clinton-Gore campaign and China's Central Military Commission, the highest military authority in the PRC.
The Chinese government became so concerned that its campaign contribution scheme would be exposed that it dispatched an undercover operative to Los Angeles last year to threaten Johnny Chung and his family with physical harm if Chung cooperated with federal prosecutors. The FBI wired Chung for the meetings with the Chinese agent, and eventually struck a deal with Chung allowing him to testify publicly this May before the House Committee on Government Reform. Transcripts of Chung's secret meetings with the Chinese agent, recently posted on the Internet, show the extraordinary efforts by the Chinese government to buy Chung's silence. The Chinese agent, Robert Luu, specifically told Chung never to reveal to U.S. investigators that two U.S. companies selling China critical technology--Hughes Electronics and Loral Space Systems--were tied to Liu Chaoying, who was Chung's link back to Chinese military intelligence. In one taped session, aired on the Fox News Network on May 24, the two discussed a cover-up scheme. "So blame it on the Princelings," Chung said, referring to the sons and daughters of top Chinese Communist Party officials. Replied Luu: "Yes. Chairman Jiang agreed to handle it like this. The president over here also agreed."
Senate investigators have also begun looking into a 76-page confidential report, prepared by the Office of the Comptroller of the Currency (OCC), which documents how the Chinese government transferred $92 million to front companies in California through the Far East National Bank in Los Angeles from 1994 to 1996. Government investigators told TAS that the money was used to buy political influence; to finance intelligence gathering and high-tech procurement operations; and more mundanely, to establish overseas investments for various Princelings. The OCC report was sent to the Senate Banking Committee on May 9 by Senate Intelligence Committee Chairman Richard Shelby (R-Ala.). In his letter of referral, Shelby said the money was wired to the California bank "either directly or through front companies, by the People's Bank of China," and wound up in accounts "created for the front companies by bank officers." Shelby noted he was "very concerned that some of the individuals and entities involved are reported to be, or believed to be associated with PRC intelligence activities in some manner."
The China Plan
Ever since Sen. Fred Thompson (R-Tenn.) stunned members of the Senate Governmental Affairs Committee by revealing the existence of a "China Plan" to influence the 1996 U.S. elections through campaign contributions, the administration and its Democratic allies on Capitol Hill have sought to steer the media away from any linkage between illegal campaign donations and administration high-technology export control policies. Similarly, when the Cox Committee began to examine the export of high-technology goods and services to China, it explicitly excluded campaign contributions from its purview. Now, for the first time, these once-separate issues are being linked through documentary evidence, which shows they were part of a concerted effort that can be traced back to the highest echelons of the Chinese government. "This was not some fluke or rogue operation," one U.S. government investigator told TAS. "This leads directly back to Jiang Zemin."
Weldon says he had been helped in his investigation by individuals he calls "patriots," who continue to work inside the U.S. government bureaucracy despite attempts by the administration to destroy their careers. (Five such individuals testified before the House Armed Services Committee on June 24.) These officials have provided unclassified documents tying the campaign contributions to the high-technology giveaway, and provided insight as to how the technology transfers to Communist China have been organized. (Documents provided to TAS included corporate registry information acquired in Hong Kong, and unclassified U.S. government cables detailing the ownership of Chinese government front companies operating in Hong Kong and the United States.)
At his press conference, and during a June 7 floor statement televised by C- SPAN, Weldon presented two color-coded charts describing his findings based on these documents and a series of background briefings from U.S. government officials. A flow chart entitled "The China Connection" shows a welter of Chinese government entities, banks, and front companies engaged in high-tech espionage and illegal campaign contributions in the U.S. Another "Timeline" chart graphically demonstrates how the campaign donations were linked to Clinton administration decisions to liberalize national security export controls, decisions which the Cox Committee report has shown to have seriously compromised U.S. national security.
According to Weldon, the two charts reveal:
* a systematic effort by the Chinese military at the highest levels to target and acquire technology for military modernization;
* that this effort was planned and implemented by Chinese military intelligence through the second department of the Central Military Commission's General Staff Department;
* that despite efforts going back more than a quarter-century, the Chinese military only succeeded in acquiring many of these targeted technologies after 1993;
* that the Chinese military set up a series of front companies and intermediaries to mask its technology targeting efforts and to launder money to hide its origin. As part of this effort, it enlisted the infamous Macao and Hong Kong Chinese Triad;
* that even after the U.S. government learned of the diversion of the W-88 nuclear warhead design in late 1995 and 1996, the Clinton administration continued to liberalize export controls on such sensitive technologies as computers, encryption, machine tools, telecommunications, stealth technologies, space launch technologies, satellites, gas turbine engines, and high temperature furnaces.
In some respects, Weldon's argument is not novel. Congressional aides William C. Triplett II and Edward Timperlake, in their best-selling account of the DNC fund-raising caper, Year of the Rat, alleged that DNC fund-raiser John Huang was a spy for Beijing (See "The DNC's Chinese Money Laundry," TAS, November 1998). A good friend of Bill and Hillary Clinton, Huang used his influence to obtain a Top Secret security clearance on January 31, 1994, five months before he was officially appointed to a Department of Commerce job, thanks to Hillary Clinton's insistent lobbying. Year of the Rat alleged that Huang's purpose was to gain access to classified U.S. intelligence information of use to the Riady family and their Chinese intelligence service masters. This thesis was given additional weight by Senator Thompson, who acknowledged classified information detailing "a long-term relationship between the Riadys and a Chinese intelligence agency." That agency is known as Er Bu, the Second Department of the People's Liberation Army's General Staff Department, and is the Chinese equivalent of the Defense Intelligence Agency. It is headed by General Ji Shengde, a close political ally of President Jiang Zemin....
The rest of the article is available online at: Partners in Crime (http://www.freerepublic.com/forum/a37916657174c.htm)
- SEAGOON
PS: If you aren't happy with the source, I can get some other synopses which say essentially the same thing from British sources.
-
Climton sold out for the same girls Mao & Kissinger sold out for, the ones in 73's 'tard
-
Hell, I'm not in the least a Billy Fan.. but the other side of the coin is Billy the Slut brought China into the WTO and made the US China's largest trading partner.. and at the same time passed over to Taipei the Ageis missile defense system.
I have no clue what the long term effect of Billy's slutty lil china deals are.. did technology change hands? oh yah. were big US corporations leaking tech to the east like hemophiliacs? yup. was our missile tech stolen right from under us by a chinese agent in los alamos? you betcha.
is china in a better state technology wize and economically thanks to Billy the ho? no doubt.
now here's the 20 billion lives question.. what interest would china now[/i] have in attacking the US? what was the core of billy-boy's rationale for romancing the chinese?
i dunno.. beyond 'de-commieizing' their economy? (wild guess that) I find it kinda dubious that the clinton white house needed chinese cash to win an election against GHB or Dole; but again, that's another wild guess.
Comparitvely, US China relations are a whole lot more cordial now than what they were 12 years ago.. or so it would seem.
here's a link on the status of china/US relations at the close of billarys administration.. interesting; but accurate? again, I dunno.
Comapritive Connection (http://www.csis.org/pacfor/cc/004Qus_china.html)
But is billy a Tricky Dick level bastard?
Check back in 50 years.. maybe we'll know then.
-
comeon now mt.... admit that you were fibbing when you said that you" would sure like to see it"
I don't imagine you are "likeing" it a bit.
lazs
-
COSCO
-
Do you remember the PC game 688 Attack Sub? If you played the Russian sub there was this "Toshiba" sign on the sonar panel that was partially blocked out by some sign in Russian. IIRC Toshiba had sold some secret technology to the Soviets at that time. I thought it was hilarious.
-
LOL... it's been almost 12 years, now. Nobody has ever mentioned that frame. I figured nobody would ever notice.
:cool:
-
I was active duty in the Navy at the time. Of COURSE I noticed! Between that and Their Finest Hour I wasted alot of time on that ole 286 in the Cargo Office after-hours. Those were the days...
-
Their Finest Hour made many of us waste a great many hours.
It had that thing, that thing that is now so rare......... plain old fun.
-
I tossed pretty much all the old DOS stuff out when I moved last year. I regret lettin that one go. I've got it's last iteration around here gatherin bugs and dust in a box somewhere.. Janes/EA picked it up.
-
i still have 688 and their finest hour by lucasfilms for the amiga. been years since i heard thoses names
-
I think I may have TFH and an expansion for it hanging around somewhere. Couldn't bear to let it go.
It did have an expansion disk, didn't it?
Dang that was fun.
-
Battlehawks was the precursor to Their Finest Hour and I played it alot but TFH was the grand-daddy flight sim of all flight sims to me. Look up the "Moment of zen in a PC game" thread and you'll see it was my most memorable moment during a PC-DOS based game.
-
Oh man, I hijacked the **** out of this thread. Sorry about that MT, wasn't my intention.
-
Harpoon 2.
muahahahahhahhaha!!
-
Battlehawks 1942 followed by SWOTL
had to upgrade the ole 286 12mhz 2 meg to a 386 dx33 4 meg for that one - great fun
-
Clinton's DOE let the Chinese into the National Labs. I still can't believe that happened. It's like letting the Ambassador de Sadesky see the big board.
-
reads like a clancy novel, don't it?
scary sheeitte. my mind reels at the assinine hypocricy that's become the Government of The United States of America.
-
Originally posted by Hangtime
reads like a clancy novel, don't it?
As long as it isn't like The Bear and the Dragon... that thing dragged it to the end, and when the shooting started it was hardly worth the dire start, and middle...and the president making the last stand on the Aegis boat at anchor was complete bollocks...
Tronsky
-
MT, you must be trolling.
-
Hangs analysis seems about right to me. All the "evidence" in Seagoons post is suspect at least, and a stretch at best.
No matter how much the cons hate Clinton... and hate they do... there is no way in hell that the main stream media would sit on a story of global implications like this one.
The politics of the media is not relevent. The only thing that is relevent is that the rags sell. 'China handed the farm' would sell like hotcakes. Only it didn't really happen that way, did it?
Maybe just maybe the trade deals Clinton's admin worked up have brought a huge new player into the global marketplace.
Maybe just maybe this was a long sighted plan to bolster capitalism around the world by providing for huge growth potential?
Or maybe he just wanted to buy that 60 second TV spot in Michigan to lock up the race against Dole.... Buahahahahahah!
-
I've never looked into the Clinton & China issue, but on past form I would take anything Kenneth Timmerman writes with large pinch of salt.
-
Lets see, it looks like a dead fish, smells like a dead fish, tastes like a dead fish, is laying next to the waters edge, and MT says "Oh, I dont believe it is a dead fish, I didnt read about it in the newspaper, and you cant believe the fisherman who says its a dead fish".
Typical.
Bill was scum. Power hungry, deceitful, no morals, no ethics, greedy.
Hillary, same but throw in evil.
MT is in love.
dago
-
Hi Again MT,
Originally posted by midnight Target
Hangs analysis seems about right to me. All the "evidence" in Seagoons post is suspect at least, and a stretch at best.
Ok, I'll freely admit that I'm a little slow on the uptake, but your comment above has me a little confused. Most of the "evidence" in Timmerman's article came from government sources, in particular the FBI and Senate Subcommittees. The evidence itself was, by and large, not even disputed by the Democrats and you'll remember that Johnny Chung was convicted based on it. In fact, even the Democrats did not even bother to argue that Chung was not working to buy influence for the Chinese government via campaign contributions. The arguments were that it wasn't really important, that there were more important issues we needed to be focused on, that there were no connections, or in Star Wars parlance These aren't the droids you're looking for or as Democratic Congressman Tom Lantos put it: Johnny Chung is “a very minor, insignificant puppet of the Communist regime.”
The contributions from the Chinese PLA are indisputible (heck the Democrats even had to give $360,000 of it back), their objectives were clear - the FBI has them on record via wiretaps as seeking influence and access to restricted technology, and the fact that such technology as the design for the WD-88 Nuclear Warhead and the much longed for ability to create MRV'd missles was illegally transferred to China. We also know that restrictions on US companies selling (or doing cooperative agreements) High-Tech and Restricted technology vital for modern weapons development was also lifted during the Clinton Administration after illegal Chinese campaign contributions (and when you figure in all the sources we are talking millions, not hundreds of thousands) began flowing to re-election coffers.
What Timmerman does then is to take 1 and 1 and 2 and put the plus sign and the equals in what he thinks are the appropriate places whereas Democratic claims are that the illegal campaign contributions, the Chinese ambitions, and the massive technology transfers are ultimately unrelated. And that the explanation is in fact that the Campaign contributions were due to lax campaign finance laws, the technology transfers were unintentional and due to incompetence and bad security, and the fact that the Chinese ultimately got most of what they hoped to buy was an unhappy coincidence.
So, it seems to me that you can either buy Timmerman's explanation or the Democratic explanation of the evidence, but the evidence itself remains. You are free of course to do either.
- SEAGOON
PS: Here's a question for you MT, why do you think the Chinese People's Liberation Army "Liked Clinton" and gave him contributions but not Dole? Ditto Gore over Bush in 2000? I'm just interested in hearing your theory.
-
clinton is traitor now that the us and china share many common interests and are somewhat dependent on each other.
reagan let iraqi doctors into the cdc and sent them home with complementary gifts, he deserves to be lionized.
hang, your post is littered with too much common sense to be understood.
-
Originally posted by Seagoon
Hi Again MT,
PS: Here's a question for you MT, why do you think the Chinese People's Liberation Army "Liked Clinton" and gave him contributions but not Dole? Ditto Gore over Bush in 2000? I'm just interested in hearing your theory.
First of all Timmerman drawns exactly ZERO actual connections between the money and President Clinton's actions.
In answer to your PS. question... Maybe they knew who the winner was gonna be...
in both races.
:cool: