-Caveat Lector- >From TheNewAustralian http://www.newaus.com.au/asia118treason.html The New Australian Clinton's guarantee to Beijing By Peter Zhang No. 118, 10-16 May 1999 Clinton's Chinese spying scandal is like super glue — I just cannot get away from it. Much as I prefer to write about the state of the Chinese economy, readers keep insisting on information about Beijing's intelligence activities despite my protestations of being inadequately informed on the subject. The most frequent question is: "What was in it for China." Though I had raised the same question myself, it was only in a rhetorical sense as I thought, at least by now, that the answer was obvious. Clinton gave Beijing a free reign and a guarantee that its activities would not be interrupted during, what he quaintly calls, his "watch" so that China could clear out America's military and high-tech secrets. Simple. But questions regarding Clinton, particularly on this matter, only lead to more questions. How could Beijing be certain that Clinton, even as president of the United States, could make good such a guarantee? One, I think, should start with his governorship of Arkansas. There seems little doubt that Clinton ran it as his personal fiefdom, replacing or shoving aside those who could prove troublesome. Some would argue that this is the norm. That is probably true in American politics, but not to the corrupt and ruthless extent that Clinton practised it. His approach to power and people is truly medieval, minus the noblesse oblige. Given this fact, and his support in the media, it is not surprising that reports made out to Chinese intelligence suggested that Clinton would be favourably disposed to dealing with Chinese representatives — for a price. Intelligence assessments were supported by Clinton's action, shortly after entering (or is it soiling?) the Oval Office, in asking all US Attorneys to resign. This unprecedented and dictatorial move gave the Clinton administration control over the prosecutorial machinery of the federal government in every judicial district in the US. No need to tell you who was impressed by this breathtakingly brazen move. Why Clinton even tried to appoint Webster Hubbel to the post of Attorney General. Imagine where that would have led. But what struck a particular chord was the way the American media acquiesced to the Clintons' manoeuvres. Beijing does not underrate the power of the Western media, especially in America. That, with the exception of a few lone voices, it was prepared to collaborate with the Clintons gave further assurance to Beijing that Clinton was able to deliver. But what of the CIA and the FBI, asked some readers? I have no wish to be patronising, but the naiveté of the American public is almost touching. It didn't even notice that William Sessions, FBI Director, a man noted for his integrity and opposition to political interference in the Bureau's affairs, was removed as quickly as Clinton moved into the Oval office. There is no doubt that Clinton deliberately acted to chain the CIA and the National Security Agency as well as the FBI. One method was to have Clinton supporters in sensitive positions so that they could delay, if not derail, any budding investigations into Clinton's China operations. With these bodies effectively neutered Chinese intelligence would have a field day. Now being ineffective does not mean uninformed. These agencies new very well what Chinese intelligence was up to but were largely powerless to do anything. After all, what could they do when the commander in chief, the president himself, had, by his actions, made it clear that investigations into China's spying activities were not to be implemented. Just to make sure that nothing embarrassing emerged, Clinton appointed Janet Reno to head the Justice Department with the intention of sabotaging any investigations into Chinese intelligence operations. I should point out at this stage that several Chinese officials let it drop that they believed Clinton was blackmailing Reno over certain activities concerning her personal life. Whatever the truth of the matter, Reno's role as the last of Clinton's gatekeepers, so to speak, has more than satisfied Beijing's expectations by thoroughly corrupting the Justice Department and blocking FBI requests. No wonder Beijing was so satisfied with its part of the deal that if felt sufficiently in command to 'request' that Clinton see to it that John Huang be given top security clearance and placed in a favourable position, favourable to Chinese intelligence, that is. Thus we find Huang being given a position in the Commerce Department at the insistence of Clinton. Hence he was able to use his security clearance to directly obtain information from the CIA. I am told that CIA officials were in no doubt about Huang's activities but were held in check by Clinton, despite CIA complaints. Does any reader honestly believe that Clinton is so innocent that he had no idea why Beijing wanted a security clearance for Huang? Of course he knew. So did Beijing really think it was going to get away with spying activities? Of course it did. And it has. Chinese intelligence expected eventual exposure but calculated that by the time it occurred the damage would be done. It was right. Clinton, not China, emptied the Candy store with devastating results for American security. The consequences will be felt for many years to come. To put it bluntly: President William Jefferson Clinton is guilty of high treason. It's time Americans woke up to that awful fact. The New Australian http://www.newaus.com.au/peter.html Clinton's policy disasters from China and Thailand to Serbia The New Australian No. 119, 17-23 May 1999 On 4 June 1989 thousands of students flooded into Tiananmen Square to demand liberty and democracy. Inspired by America's example, they carried large models of the Statue of Liberty; the American embassy, which had given asylum to the dissident Feng Lizhi, was treated as if it was sacred ground. This was the moment when the Soviet Empire was crumbling and, thanks to Ronald Reagan, America's power and moral standing had no equal. China's leadership was unnerved and confused. Ten years later thousands of students are once again flooding into Tiananmen Square, not to demand liberty or justice but to damn the United States and desecrate its flag. Where once the police had to prevent students from paying homage to the US embassy they now have to stop them from burning it down. A leadership that was uncertain of its future and authority has now reasserted itself and is as politically confident as ever, treating with contempt US objections to human rights abuses while sneering at calls for greater political liberalisation. What brought about this radical and dangerous change in perceptions? The answer is President William Jefferson Clinton. Within a matter of years this depraved and cowardly man has virtually destroyed the moral authority of the United States among China's emerging intelligentsia and ignited a very dangerous brand of nationalism. Even the Chinese leadership cannot believe its luck. Not only did this man sell his country's secrets to Beijing, he even destroyed its moral credibility among the Chinese people. And for what? Of course Beijing has helped organise and channel the demonstrations. It would have been stupid not to. Nonetheless, the outpouring of hate and anger was spontaneous. Once again, Chinese nationalists reasoned, China was being treated with contempt by gui laos just as in the nineteenth century. Old wounds have now been reopened and new ones inflicted. All of this was sadly predictable. While other papers and magazines were publishing stories about China's so-called communist regime The New Australian was drawing attention to the sinister rise of Chinese nationalism whose nineteenth century cousins spawned German and Japanese militarism1. Though it is true that China does not have the kind of traditions that gave rise to German and Japanese militaris it does have an authoritarian tradition that can, in my opinion, be channelled into a militaristic culture. On the other hand, this would then run into the Chinese respect for commerce and its strong materialistic drive2. This, however, is speculation and what really matters at the moment is the present for it will shape the future. And right now it is Clinton who is turning out to be the trigger that is detonating Chinese nationalism, to the delight of China's rulers. The ramifications are far reaching and dangerous. Far from impressing China, as did Desert Storm, the Serbian war has convinced many in the leadership that the US is truly a paper tiger. Sure it has the military means but it does not have the will, or so it is thought. If Americans, as one official told me, had the strength of character and moral fortitude they believe themselves to possess they would have thrown Clinton out of the Oval Office. I personally dispute this assessment. But what I think is of no consequence. The important thing is that many influential people in Beijing are beginning to think this way — and that is dangerous for all of us. Clinton is one of those odious creatures whose moral turpitude sees them ignore even the near-term consequences of their actions, no matter how damaging, in favour of immediate gratification. This is something that Beijing has exploited with its usual political cunning. An excellent example is Clinton's unbelievably stupid and arrogant action of vetoing the candidacy of the Thai Deputy Prime Minister Supachai Panitchpakdi to the director-generalship of the World Trade Organisation, even though no one seriously disputes he is by far the superior candidate. So why the veto after promising to support him?3 Because he opposed the insertion of labour clauses into free trade agreements because they are designed destroy Asian jobs. And who insisted on these clauses? Why American unions who are also big donators to the Clinton and Gore campaigns. Not content with breaking his promise to Thailand he then insults and treats the country with utter contempt, despite the fact that it has been one of America's strongest Asian allies. And who is Clinton now supporting? Mike Moore, former prime minister of New Zealand, the country that abandoned the Western alliance even as Thailand stood shoulder to shoulder with Washington. Thailand has now come to realise how latter-day America treats loyal allies. The result is that anti-American sentiment is on the rise in the country and this is fuelling the call for a reorientation of foreign policy away from the US and the West. And guess who is moving to fill the vacuum? Yes, Beijing. Even now, as the Serbian and Asian fiascoes unfold, Americans do not realise the price they are going to pay for not having forced Clinton from office and discounted character as a mark of leadership. 1 China has generals but where is Bismarck? <<hot link at site>> 2Despite what many Westerners naively think, the Chinese are among the world's most materialistic people. 3There is no question that the Clinton administration assured the Thai government that Supachai Panitchpakdi would have its full support. So much for a Clinton promise. The New Australian Statement of Principles In the past year, we have witnessed a phenomenal growth in the readership of the ‘New Australian’. During that time, the amount of mail that we receive has proportionally increased. Most of this mail has been approving, but there is a residue of ill informed, and often wildly abusive, mail, most of it from the left. For the record, I would like to state our broad philosophical stand for those readers who are interested. (1) Political Philosophy: The New Australian stands for the classical liberalism of people such as John Locke, America’s Founding Fathers, Lord Acton, and the English Whigs. American readers need to note that the word ‘liberal’ has long been corrupted in their country, and now means the opposite of its correct meaning. British readers should note that we totally reject the condescending paternalism of the old Conservative Party. However, we broadly support Margaret Thatcher, whose philosophy was not Tory, but Whig, and filled the space vacated by the collapse of the Liberal Party. Australian readers should note that there has never been a tradition of genuine liberalism in their country. Sir Robert Menzies and his Liberal Party represented a kind of benign toryism, not true liberalism. It needs to be clearly stated that we are not anarchists, or so-called ‘libertarians’. We do not oppose government as such, but believe in the necessity for a strong, honest, decentralized, and limited government if freedom is to be preserved. (2) Economics: Here we are fairly closely aligned with the Austrian school of economics: that of Karl Menger, Böhm-Bawerk, Ludwig von Mises, and Friedrich Hayek (Nobel Prize laureate 1976). hese are the major creative scholars in Austrian school economics. There are many other Austrian school economists around the world. The Austrian school demonstrates how a free society, which necessarily includes a free economy, maximizes human opportunity, culture, and non-wasteful wealth creation. It accepts that human behavior is far too complex to be mathematizable, but it is the only school of economics with a successful predictive record in the laboratory of economic history, and consequently the only form of economic analysis which can correctly be described as scientific. We do have some common ground with certain economists outside the Austrian school, such as Milton Freidman. (3) Law: We believe that the legal structure of a country should be clearly defined, objective, non-partisan, and basically concerned with the protection of life and property. We believe that most matters requiring government intervention or definition should be handled at a local level, with the central government only concerned with defense, and the definition and protection of non invasive rights. We reject the collectivist idea that the law is an appropriate vehicle for the orchestration of people’s peaceful behavior. (4) Religion: We believe in the separation of church and state as a necessity for a free society. The New Australian’s attitude to religion is one of broad tolerance; its editor is a Christian, and its assistant editor a life-long atheist. (5) Epistemology: We stand for objectivity, reason, and scientific analysis. We do not cling desperately to outmoded doctrines that have provably failed. (6) Technique: We present our ideas in a strongly polemical form. This is a valid tradition in intellectual discourse, and one that the left has employed shamelessly for the duration of this century. We make no apologies for it. (7) Those whom we criticize have a full right of reply, and are given as much space as they need. So far, no journalist has accepted this offer. Charles Murton Assistant Editor The New Australian A<>E<>R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller, German Writer (1759-1805) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. A<>E<>R ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ The only real voyage of discovery consists not in seeking new landscapes but in having new eyes. -Marcel Proust + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + A merely fallen enemy may rise again, but the reconciled one is truly vanquished. -Johann Christoph Schiller, German Writer (1759-1805) + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + It is preoccupation with possessions, more than anything else, that prevents us from living freely and nobly. -Bertrand Russell + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + Forwarded as information only; no endorsement to be presumed + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + + In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. section 107, this material is distributed without charge or profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving this type of information for non-profit research and educational purposes only. DECLARATION & DISCLAIMER ========== CTRL is a discussion and informational exchange list. Proselyzting propagandic screeds are not allowed. Substance—not soapboxing! These are sordid matters and 'conspiracy theory', with its many half-truths, misdirections and outright frauds is used politically by different groups with major and minor effects spread throughout the spectrum of time and thought. That being said, CTRL gives no endorsement to the validity of posts, and always suggests to readers; be wary of what you read. CTRL gives no credeence to Holocaust denial and nazi's need not apply. Let us please be civil and as always, Caveat Lector. ======================================================================== Archives Available at: http://home.ease.lsoft.com/archives/CTRL.html http:[EMAIL PROTECTED]/ ======================================================================== To subscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SUBSCRIBE CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] To UNsubscribe to Conspiracy Theory Research List[CTRL] send email: SIGNOFF CTRL [to:] [EMAIL PROTECTED] Om
