-Caveat Lector-

July 12, 1999
CHRISTOPHER HITCHENS


The Spies Who Fleeced Us
It's always suspicious when Washingtonians start breaking into bad Latin.
There may be a quid, you hear them say, and there seems to be a quo.
But--aha--there's no smoking pro to connect the two. This pseudo-talk
combines my least favorite styles: that of the overpaid attorney and that of
the overpaid political obfuscator. Thus, it is not denied that Chinese
military-industrial sources managed to transfer an awful lot of money to the
Democratic National Committee. Nor is it denied that many tranches of
valuable information made their way from American nuclear laboratories into
the computer systems of the People's Republic of China. Nor is it denied that
large American corporations were eager to share missile and satellite
technology with the PRC, and that they, too, were generous to the DNC. All
that is denied is that these things have anything to do with one another. In
the current case, however, every one of the Clintonian defenses raises
additional suspicions:

� The White House "line of the day" says that Chinese espionage is nothing
new and was known to occur under previous, Republican administrations. In
that case, they had every reason to be vigilant, when all the evidence shows
they were not.

� The President says that he was not told of any espionage until March 19
this year. Not only does this tell against the smug claim of previous
awareness of the problem, but it flatly contradicts Sandy Berger's claim to
have been briefed by Energy Department intelligence as far back as July 1997
and to have passed on the briefing to Clinton "within a day or two." Not even
Lanny Davis has been able to confect an explanation for this discrepancy.

� The Clinton Administration, through legal measures such as the
Anti-Terrorism and Intelligence Authorization acts, has been treating the
Fourth Amendment as an inconvenience since at least 1996. The chief exhibit
in this contempt for the Constitution is the "roving wiretap," whereby any
phone to which a suspect is "reasonably proximate" can be invigilated by the
FBI. Yet when the FBI asked Justice for permission to tap the phone of Wen Ho
Lee, a scientist at the Los Alamos labs, Janet Reno's amazing subordinates
three times turned down the application. We now know that in 1996 her
judicial review panel authorized all 839 wiretap warrants that it received.

Now, was there anything else going on, between about 1996 and now, that could
make the Administration at all touchy about Chinese penetration? Well, there
were the numerous Senate hearings at which it was established--and not
denied--that the DNC and the 1996 Clinton/Gore campaign had shredded such
distinction as existed between "hard" and "soft" political donations. Going
back a bit further, there are intimate connections between the Riady
Corporation--a front for Chinese interests--and Clinton's original financial
backers in Arkansas. The Worthen Bank, owned by Clinton's longtime backer
Jackson Stephens, was the conduit for a large Riady loan in 1992--just in
time to save the financially exhausted Clinton campaign. Only Webster Hubbell
knows for sure about the provenance of some of this dough. Here is Jeffrey
Garten, formerly Clinton's Under Secretary of Commerce for International
Trade (and a onetime Nixon and Kissinger underling), recalling his work for
Ron Brown in an incautious Newsweek essay in March 1997:

John Huang, the suspicious DNC official, was a Commerce official first. You
can't understand the 1996 money mess without grasping the environment in
which commercial diplomacy was born. It is, after all, the major thrust of
the President's foreign policy.... In our single-minded drive to help
American companies, we dramatically expanded our commercial involvement in
big emerging markets like China, India and Brazil. This push attracted a lot
of foreigners who wanted to play in the new game.... There were people, like
the Riadys or Charlie Trie or Johnny Chung, who may have thought they could
gear this process to their own enrichment by buying special influence. If you
open a wild bazaar, as we did, you have to expect the occasional pickpocket.
Here is another series of admissions in the guise of excuses. (The term
"commercial diplomacy" is worth having, you must admit.) A former senior
official affirms that there was a revolving door between the Commerce
Department and a bunch of shady businessmen, all of whom are friends and
backers of the President. And you notice (see my last "Minority Report") that
all the "pickpockets" identified as polluting this otherwise noble enterprise
have Asian names. How this squares with Clinton's indignation about
"Asian-bashing" is more than I can say.

John Huang gave the First Lady's chief of staff a check for $50,000 to gain
"access" for his Chinese military-industrial backers. Bernard Schwartz of
Loral Space & Communication gave almost twenty times that to the DNC and
secured his company a seat on Commerce Department plane trips to China, in
the course of which satellite technology was unglued from burdensome export
licensing. Hughes Electronics people went the same route. Huang has now been
deposed by Judicial Watch in its landmark lawsuit against the Commerce
Department and has been asked about his role as a Chinese agent, his role at
the DNC and his role at Commerce. He has so far invoked the protection of the
Fifth Amendment more than one thousand times, which is believed to be an
indoor record (and invoked it in answer to such questions as "Do you
recognize the late Ronald Brown in this photograph?"). If only our Fourth
Amendment rights were as secure as his Fifth Amendment ones.

Meanwhile, as the conservatives at Judicial Watch point out, the bizarre
thing is the relative silence of the Republican leadership on all this. Far
from being "partisan," they have let the Cox report and its implications
lapse. Perhaps they, too, believe in "commercial diplomacy" and its resultant
donations. If so, then the metaphor of Mutually Assured Destruction operates
as smoothly between the two parties as it once did--and may again--between
this superpower and its challengers.

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

Reply via email to