DOWNSIDE LEGACY AT TWO DEGREES OF PRESIDENT CLINTON
SECTION: BEHIND THE TREASON ALLEGATIONS
SUBSECTION: RED FLAGS OF TREASON – General Part 4
Revised 8/15/99

 

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...Too many commentators are missing the point about the national security significance of the Cox Report and its revelation of China's theft of U.S. nuclear secrets. It is time to face the truth: This president and this administration are singularly culpable for orchestrating a politically inspired coverup to advance policies they knew were causing harm to U.S. national security. Let's not be distracted by the self-serving Clinton spin: everybody does it; that it all happened during previous administrations; that there is equal blame to go around on all sides, that Bill Clinton acted quickly and properly when he found out. All of this is wrong, a dishonest smokescreen designed to divert attention from the real issues. It is also an attempt to dissuade people from actually reading the Cox Report and discovering for themselves that the Clinton spin is a delusion...."

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...Sixteen of the 17 most significant major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report were discovered after 1994. The notion that Presidents Carter, Reagan and Bush knew the extent to which China's efforts to steal U.S. nuclear and military technology were successful is fantasy...."

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...At least eight (and maybe more) of these breaches actually occurred after 1994 and after it was well-known to the Clinton administration that China had been illegally proliferating arms technology to rogue countries around the world. Among these breaches--occurring on the Clinton watch--are many of those that go the farthest in advancing China's potential as a direct nuclear threat to the United States. These include:

(1) The transfer of the so-called Legacy Codes containing data on 50 years of U.S. nuclear weapons development including more than 1,000 nuclear tests.

(2) The sale and diversion to military purposes of more than 600 high-performance computers enabling China to enhance its development of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and advanced military aviation equipment.

(3) The compromise of nuclear warhead simulation technology enhancing China's ability to perfect miniature nuclear warheads without actual testing.

(4) The compromise of advanced electromagnetic weapons technology useful in the development of anti-satellite and anti-missile systems.

(5) The transfer of missile nose cone technology enabling China to substantially improve the reliability of its intercontinental ballistic missiles.

(6) The transfer of missile guidance technology enabling China to substantially improve the accuracy of its ballistic missiles.

(7) The compromise of super-secret space-based radar technology giving China the ability to detect our previously undetectable submerged submarines.

(8) The compromise of some other "classified thermonuclear weapons information" which "the Clinton administration" (not the Cox committee) "has determined...cannot be made public."

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...President Clinton, who was given a copy of the Cox Report on Jan. 3, lied to the American people on March 19 when he conveyed the message he was unaware that anyone suspected there were breaches of nuclear-related secrets during his presidency. ..."

 

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...The breach of the design of the W-88 miniaturized nuclear warhead--which happened in the 1980s and was discovered in 1995--is enormously significant to America's national security. According to Paul Redmond, the CIA's former counterintelligence chief who caught Soviet spy Aldrich Ames, it is "far more damaging to the national security than Aldrich Ames," and "as bad as the Rosenbergs." The Rosenbergs were executed for compromising atomic bomb secrets to the Soviets. The idea Sandy Berger of the White House National Security Council--who was fully briefed about the W-88 technology breach in April 1996--did not immediately communicate this information to the president is preposterous. Mr. Berger now claims he did not tell the president until early 1998, or perhaps July 1997, depending on which of his two stories you want to believe. I don't believe either one because neither makes sense. Mr. Berger is a political operative, a longtime Clinton friend and confidant--not to mention, a pretty smart guy. He attended all the major 1996 Clinton campaign strategy meetings. When he learned China had stolen the W-88--the crown jewel of the U.S. nuclear arsenal--is it plausible he did not immediately tell the president ? No, not unless you want to assume a level of incompetence at the White House that even this administration's harshest critics do not believe for a minute...."

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...The president had to have known about the W-88 breach no later than April 1996, well before the 1996 election. The president deliberately withheld this vital national security information from key members of Congress for obvious political reasons. He withheld it for almost three years--a coverup that is nothing less than a scandal of gigantic proportions. If it were not for the Cox committee--formed by House Speaker Newt Gingrich, not by Mr. Clinton--Congress and the American people would still be in the dark..."

The Washington Times 6/20/99 James Inhofe "...The Clinton administration coverup was recently exposed in testimony before the Senate Armed Services Committee. Notra Trulock, the Energy Department's former director of intelligence, who had first briefed Mr. Berger in April 1996, testified he was prepared to brief members of the House and Senate Intelligence Committees as late as July 1998, but was denied permission to do so by Acting Energy Secretary Elizabeth Moler, a political appointee. Miss Moler reportedly ordered Mr. Trulock not to conduct the briefing because she said the information would be used to hurt Mr. Clinton's China policy. When Miss Moler refuted this testimony and claimed she did not recall gagging Mr. Trulock in this way, I asked both officials if they would voluntarily submit to a polygraph test. Both agreed at the hearing, but when pressed several weeks later, only Mr. Trulock was readily willing to cooperate and go through with taking the test. As a result, it is obvious to me Mr. Trulock was telling the truth and Miss Moler was not, confirming rather conclusively that there was indeed a politically inspired coverup...."

Salon 6/21/99 David Horowitz "...Why is Clinton furiously covering up for the communist Chinese and protecting its leaders and their spies from the wrath that should surely follow their rape of America's most guarded secrets? Certainly not, as Clinton and his complicit Democrat defenders now claim, because "everyone does it." Unlike China, for example, the state of Israel is a democracy and a proven ally of the United States. Yet when an Israeli agent named Jonathan Pollard was discovered stealing secrets whose dimensions did not even approach the seriousness of these thefts (no technologies, for example, were involved), he was given a life sentence amid the most solemn anathemas from the officials of the government he betrayed The evidence suggests only one conclusion. The reason Clinton is protecting China's spies and their communist masters is because in protecting them he is protecting himself. The China strategy is fully intelligible in the frame of Clinton's strategy on other matters: The president has triangulated with China's communist government in pursuit of his own political interest at the expense of the United States....."

Nation 6/12/99 Christopher Hitchens "....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...."

Nation 6/12/99 Christopher Hitchens "....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." ...."

Nation 6/12/99 Christopher Hitchens "....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.

 

Worldnetdaily 6/22/99 Charles Smith "...According to documents forced from the Clinton administration by a federal lawsuit, the Commerce Department directly engaged Chinese army and air force generals in an effort to upgrade PLA military air defenses. One example of "military" commerce involved is in a letter to PLA Gen. Huai Guomo, from Commerce Deputy Undersecretary Barry Carter. "In our opinion, the key to rapid involvement of U.S. industry in China is the development of a national civil/military strategy for modernization of Chinese airspace control," wrote Dr. Carter in his November 1994 letter to Gen. Huai (emphasis added). "Without a broad plan for harmonizing civil and military requirements," Carter wrote to Huai, "any equipment acquisitions and installations run the risk of resulting in incompatible systems that will not satisfy your national objectives." "We would like to help you develop your ATC plan," wrote Carter in his letter to Huai. "As a follow-up to the October Commission meetings, the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) Administrator will lead a delegation of senior aviation policy experts on a visit to Beijing. ... I ask your support to ensure they have the opportunity to meet with the key Chinese players -- both military and civil -- while in China." ..."

Worldnetdaily 6/22/99 Charles Smith "...During the first four years of the Clinton administration, People's Liberation Army Gen. Ding Henggao, along with his top two PLA assistants, Lt. Gen. Huai Guomo and Lt. Gen. Shen Rougjun, raided U.S. technology on a scale never before imagined..... Some of these fantastic exploits against the Clinton administration are documented in the Cox report, dealing with the theft of nose cone technology from Hughes -- largely Shen's handiwork. Likewise, some of Huai's handiwork can be found in a 1996 General Accounting Office report on the transfer of an advanced AT&T fiber-optic network to a PLA-owned company called Galaxy New Technology. However, few details on the direct relationship between their commander, Gen. Ding and top Clinton officials are covered in the Western press. Some of these lesser-publicized facts include the fact that in 1994 Bill Clinton began a program to transfer American military technology directly to the PLA. One such documented transfer began in an August 1994 meeting between the PLA warlords and Clinton administration officials in Beijing. The Chinese army side of the August 1994 meeting included top PLA officers such as Ding and Huai, who were accompanied by Gen. Deng Yousheng and Maj. Gen. Hou Gang, the deputy director of the Intelligence Department, Headquarters of General Staff of the PLA. The August 1994 PLA meeting also included an exclusive club of U.S. academia, selected by the Clinton administration to join a "U.S./Chinese Defense Conversion Commission," then run by Defense Secretary Dr. William Perry and Gen. Ding. Some of the other U.S. invitees included Commerce Deputy Undersecretary Dr. Barry Carter, a former law professor from Georgetown University, Dr. Eden Woon, the Executive Secretary for DOD Secretary Perry, and Dr. John Lewis, listed as a "Stanford University Civilian Consultant to SecDef."

Worldnetdaily 6/22/99 Charles Smith "... Woon left America in May 1997 to become the Director of the Hong Kong Chamber of Commerce, a position in which he currently represents over 2,000 businesses located in China and Hong Kong. Eden Woon is an American citizen, a former officer in the U.S. military, former advisor to Secretary of Defense Perry and former Chairman of Washington State China Relations Council...."

Worldnetdaily 6/22/99 Charles Smith "...According to Woon, "there was a lot of criticism back in the states about how this was helping the PLA. All the controversy started and some, frankly, dishonest reporting came up, which was not true, linking Dr. Lewis or Dr. Perry in ways that are, frankly, not correct." John Lewis, said Woon, "was invited to come because he was interested in defense conversion. He (Lewis) got Dr. Perry started on this. When we went to China to sign the first agreement for the first cooperation, Dr. Lewis was invited." Of course, by August 1994, Lewis had teamed with Ding's wife, Madam Nie Li in a very profitable joint "business" venture called "Hua Mei." (Interestingly, Madam Nie Li is, like her husband, also a PLA general.) Lewis ran the U.S.-China venture that led to the transfer of an advanced, encrypted, fiber-optic communications system being sold directly to a company owned by the PLA. Lewis was a paid consultant to the U.S. Defense Department, while also being executive director of the U.S. side of the "Hua Mei" joint venture. Thus, Lewis earned income from both the Chinese and U.S. Army -- at the same time. Yet, Dr. Woon also noted that there were several others in the U.S. delegation not listed on the official attendance. "Also invited on the same trip and same status was Chas Freeman," said Woon. "(Former) Assistant Secretary of Defense, one of the first or perhaps the first to revive the military relationship after Tiananmen. He left government before October 1994. He was also invited to come back as an observer." ...."

Worldnetdaily 6/22/99 Charles Smith "...Interestingly, according to a letter sent to Defense Intelligence Agency Lt. Col. Blasko, Carter noted that Woon had suggested the letter to Huai. Woon, according to Carter's fax to Blasko, reviewed the letter and approved its content....The 1994 letter to Blasko was copied to Eden Woon by Carter in a following fax transmission. Carter wrote to Woon on the copy attachment, "Eden -- FYI. Here is what I faxed to Lt. Col. Blasko last week. ... My Best, Barry." By June 1995, Dr. Woon would leave Dr. Perry and the Defense Dept. However, he remained in direct contact with PLA generals and Dr. Barry Carter. In June 1995, Carter would officially provide a list of PLA companies and contacts to Dr. Eden Woon, Executive Director of the Washington State China Relations Council (WSCRC) and Director of the Hong Kong General Chamber of Commerce. WSCRC includes major corporate sponsors such as Northwest Airlines, Boeing, Microsoft and the law firm of Preston Gates Ellis & Rouvelas Meeds. By December 1995, Woon and the WSCRC would host a delegation of Chinese army representatives from PLA-owned companies. Woon took them on a tour of the Washington State companies anxious to do business with the Chinese army. ....The 1995 delegation to Washington State included "Feng Hui, Staff officer" of the COSTIND "Foreign Affairs Dep't." Feng Hui is better known as Maj. Feng Hui of the Chinese army. Feng was accompanied by other officers from the PLA unit COSTIND, and a host of engineering specialists from various PLA-owned companies, including "Chengdu Aircraft plant," the "Jiangnan Shipyard" and "No. 614 Institute," a PLA institute staffed by weapons experts..... In 1997, Woon and WSCRC sponsored a conference that included U.S. Senator Patty Murray, D-Wash. On October 14, 1997, at the close of the conference, the participants issued a report that states, "The U.S. should ensure that Taiwan understands that if conflicts arise (especially if apparently provoked by Taiwan), it cannot necessarily count on the U.S. coming to the rescue." ..."

San Francisco Examiner 6/24/99 Paul Burgess "...At a news conference months ago, the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Army Gen. Henry Shelton, was forced to acknowledge that the timing of last year's two U.S. military operations was "absolutely incredible." His incredulity is understandable. On Aug. 20, 1998, American cruise missiles struck Sudan and Afghanistan three days after President Clinton's televised "mea sorta culpa" regarding his deposition earlier that day. Though the administration initially charged the Sudanese pharmaceutical factory with being a chemical-weapons plant, it recently unfroze $24 million worth of the owner's American assets, quietly conceding that the plant had no military value whatsoever. Operation Desert Fox (Dec. 16, 1998) commenced with air and cruise-missile strikes against Iraq mere hours before the House was to begin its impeachment debate, delaying those proceedings by a day. The president ended the operation three days later, on the same day as the impeachment vote (ostensibly out of respect for the Islamic holiday of Ramadan, though he seemed to agonize very little about bombing Yugoslavia during Easter). Gen. Shelton's amazement can only be compounded by the timing of the current Kosovo operation. Though there are many foreign-policy experts who contend there was much more negotiating to be done, the air war commenced at the same time the White House was fighting to block the recently released Cox report revealing the staggering losses of American military technology to the Chinese...."

San Francisco Examiner 6/24/99 Paul Burgess "...For those convinced that "Wag the Dog" is just a Hollywood invention, I offer a hard-to-find report titled "An Investigation into the Magnitude of Foreign Contacts." This document, penned, not by any Hollywood producer, but by Federal Reserve economists (document No. RWP97-14), is essentially a scientific quantification of the "Wag the Dog" theory. The researchers employ a lengthy and complex mathematical model to illustrate the potential advantages of small-scale wars to presidents in distress. They offer the kind of sterile, arithmetical logic that thrills academics and terrifies soldiers. Some of their conclusions: "If the information content (about the leader, and for the consumption of the electorate) of small conflicts is substantial and their costs sufficiently small, our model points to the possibility of diversionary actions being welfare-enhancing (for the leader); only when (a diversionary war) can provide information favorable to an incumbent leader can the action be successful in its purpose; even though a diversionary war may have been avoidable and may force an unwarranted cost upon the electorate, it also reveals new information about the leader's abilities which the electorate may find beneficial." ...."

San Francisco Examiner 6/24/99 Paul Burgess "...The administration's military adventures have been starkly consistent with the report's findings since its release in late 1997 (at the same time Clinton's fortunes turned south with his Paula Jones deposition). The authors hold that the benefit a leader can receive from starting a war is directly related to the perceptions that war affects in the electorate - thus, Clinton's seeming tendency to profile his wars against his scandals. Further, the president has been meticulous about keeping American casualties low and conflicts confined, possibly to keep the risks-vs.-benefits equation in balance. Finally, and most disturbingly, he seems to wage war only when it stands to benefit him personally. War has been waged neither in Rwanda nor North Korea, and we cut and ran from Somalia - humanitarian and credibility concerns notwithstanding...."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 6/24/99 Audrey Hudson "...Several government whistleblowers will testify today before a House committee that they were fired, demoted or harassed for reporting the "systematic pillaging" of U.S. military and nuclear secrets to their superiors and Congress. According to documents and advance testimony obtained by The Washington Times, the federal employees say the retaliation and harassment was directly linked to their internal criticism and testimony before Congress. ..."These witnesses have important information, and it is extremely troubling that they perceived threats to their jobs for telling the truth," said Indiana Rep. Dan Burton, the committee chairman. "We will not stand for government employees suffering retaliation simply because they told the truth about national security." ..."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 6/24/99 Audrey Hudson "...Los Alamos physicist Robert Henson, who first uncovered Chinese spying at the laboratory, was fired twice for bringing it to the attention of the Energy Department. He will testify that his firing was in retaliation for delivering a message nobody wanted to hear. He has since been reinstated at the lab after initiating a lawsuit...."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 6/24/99 Audrey Hudson "...Lt. Col. Edward McCallum, director of the office of safeguards and security at the Energy Department, says he was put on administrative leave in retaliation for criticizing security at DOE nuclear facilities...."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 6/24/99 Audrey Hudson "...Peter M. Leitner, a senior strategic trade adviser for the Defense Department and a witness in congressional investigations, says retaliation against him prompted letters from Tennessee Republican Sen. Fred Thompson to the Pentagon expressing his concern for his witness. As a result, the Office of Special Counsel is investigating political reprisals and illegal retaliation against Mr. Leitner. "Ever since these testimonies, I have been subjected to, in staccato fashion, one adverse harassing act after another," Mr. Leitner states in his testimony. He says his performance ratings were lowered and he was isolated from meetings on nuclear exports, particularly when the inspectors general were visiting the interagency meetings in response to a Senate inspection request. Mr. Leitner says he was harassed over sick leave, was given a "trumped-up" letter of reprimand, charged with a security violation and threatened with charges of insubordination. "To be victimized by my own government -- particularly the Defense Department -- for consistently putting the near- and long-term national security of the United States ahead of all other considerations is something that I still find astounding to this day," he said. In 1997, Mr. Leitner issued denials for many export-license applications from DOE laboratories, including Los Alamos, Sandia, Livermore and Oak Ridge. The licenses would have facilitated the transfer of high-technology equipment with direct application to nuclear-weapons development and testing "to the most dangerous entities within the Russian nuclear weapons" design and manufacturing complex. "I objected then and continue to object today to these so-called lab-to-lab transfers because there was no evidence of a security plan to protect U.S. technologies from being used against us," Mr. Leitner said...."

THE WASHINGTON TIMES 6/24/99 Audrey Hudson "...Jonathan Fox, an arms control specialist for the Defense Department, will tell how he was ordered to rewrite a critical memo on the eve of a state visit by Chinese President Jiang Zemin in October 1997. Mr. Fox's first memo said one deal with China presented "real and substantial risk" to the United States and allied countries." He was directed to change the memo so that it stated the agreement was "not inimical" to U.S. interests. He will testify that he has also suffered retaliatory actions...."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...The White House was told about China's apparent theft of American nuclear weapons technology in July 1995, soon after it was detected by the Energy Department and the Central Intelligence Agency, several officials said. Until now, the Administration has left the impression that the White House first learned about the matter in April 1996, when Samuel R. Berger, then President Clinton's deputy national security adviser, was briefed on the case by Energy Department officials. But interviews with current and former officials show that warnings about possible Chinese nuclear espionage received high-level attention within the Clinton Administration early in the Government's investigation of the matter...."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...Evidence that China may have stolen nuclear secrets first came to the attention of the White House during a meeting in July 1995, when the White House Chief of Staff, Leon Panetta, was informed of the problem by Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary, Panetta and other officials said. She added that Energy Department officials had also been told that the C.I.A. had gathered intelligence about the possible theft, they said. Panetta then called the C.I.A. Director, John Deutch, to find out what the agency was doing about the case, Panetta said. Deutch, who had also just received a call about the same matter from Deputy Energy Secretary Charles Curtis, told Panetta he would investigate. Panetta then told Deutch to work with the National Security Council at the White House on the case. Upset that he had not heard about the case first from officials in his own agency, Deutch called Panetta back a day or two later and told him what the C.I.A. knew about the spy case, officials said. A brief reference to such meetings between Energy Department, C.I.A. and White House officials in the summer of 1995 is also included in a new report on the case issued by the President's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board...."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...Deutch finally briefed the national security adviser, Anthony Lake, on the case in November 1995. Lake said he did not recall the briefing, but he and White House officials said there was a record of it. Before meeting with Lake, Deutch received a full briefing from the C.I.A. analysts, who convinced him that design information on the nuclear weapon -- known as the W-88 -- had been stolen by Beijing, officials said. President Clinton was not told of the evidence in 1995 by Panetta, Lake, or any of the other officials who had been briefed, according to the National Security Council spokesman, David C. Leavy. Berger also did not tell President Clinton about the case following his briefing in 1996...."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...Berger, now the national security adviser, has said that it was not until after he received a second, more specific briefing in July 1997 that he told Clinton about security problems at the nuclear weapons laboratories. Berger did take some action after his 1996 briefing, Leavy said, including directing that Congress be secretly informed. In that meeting, he also agreed with Energy Department officials on the need to strengthen security at the weapons laboratories. Working along two separate tracks initially unknown to each other, C.I.A. and Energy Department officials first began to unravel the case in the spring of 1995, when weapons designers from the Los Alamos laboratory told Energy Department intelligence officials that they were convinced China had stolen design information on the W-88, based on their analysis of a series of Chinese nuclear tests. At about the same time, American officials received a package filled with Chinese government documents, which arrived by DHL express service, officials say. Officials refused to say where the package was received or how they determined the identity of the sender...."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...C.I.A. officials analyzing the documents quickly focused on one that included what appeared to be classified design information about American nuclear weapons, including the W-88. Dated 1988, the document also included a hand drawing of a United States nuclear warhead re-entry vehicle. But initially, the C.I.A. did not tell the Energy Department -- or anyone else in the Government -- that it had obtained the W-88 document, officials say. A former senior C.I.A. official said that soon after the agency realized the significance of the W-88 document, Deutch ordered him not to disseminate it to other United States intelligence agencies. But other current United States officials familiar with the matter said that Deutch did not try to suppress the document. Instead, they said the document was not distributed immediately because it took time for the C.I.A. to translate and analyze it. Deutch refused to comment on the matter. Nevertheless, by August 1995 Energy Department's analysts had obtained a copy, even though it would not be officially distributed throughout American intelligence agencies until that December. By then, analysts had concluded that the document indeed included American nuclear secrets, officials say..."

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...After the analysts reported to Deutch in November, a broader review, dominated by the Energy Department, reported similar conclusions in April 1996. Berger was then briefed that same month, and the F.B.I. opened its criminal investigation on May 30, 1996. But in late June or July 1996, the F.B.I. dropped its investigation, a senior United States official said. The C.I.A. had just re-issued the W-88 document with a warning that the agency now believed that the source of the document was a double agent. The C.I.A.'s new assessment, coming a year after it had first received the document, led the F.B.I. to "stand down," or suspend, its investigation, the senior American official said. The suspension of the investigation lasted for about six weeks in the summer of 1996, according to the official. It resumed after the Energy Department assured the F.B.I. that even if the source was a double agent, the document nonetheless contained accurate, classified data about the W-88 warhead, and so represented a security breach.

New York Times 6/27/99 James Risen Jeff Gerth "...The C.I.A. agreed that the information in the document was accurate, and also continued its own analysis. But while the F.B.I. re-started its investigation, it remained a low priority, F.B.I. officials now concede. Only one or two agents were assigned to the investigation in 1996, officials say. By 1997, when the Justice Department denied the F.B.I.'s request to seek court authorization to wiretap and electronically monitor Lee, a move that has since become the subject of congressional inquiry, the F.B.I. still had only three or four agents on the case...."

Human Events interview of Schippers 5/28/99 Terence Jeffrey "... HE: Did they let you see an unredacted version of the LaBella memo? Did you get to see the whole thing? S: Yes. I'm one of the few people who got to see it. HE: Did you see FBI Director Louis Freeh's memo? S: I saw both of them, every word of them. HE: Can you say that having read those memos you would have still wanted to go on and investigate the China connection as an impeachable offense? S: Oh, absolutely. I mean I wanted to see the memos just to see if there was something in there that I had anticipated and that I had expected all along. HE: Can you say what that is? S: No, I can't. It goes to the China aspect. HE: When Louis Freeh testified August 4, 1998, in the House Government Reform and Oversight Committee, he was asked by Chairman Dan Burton [R.-Ind.], in effect, "Are you investigating the President and the Vice President? Freeh leaned back in his chair, leaned forward to the microphone, and said: "Yes." You have no reason to disbelieve that Louis Freeh was investigating the President and Vice President of the United States? S: No. I believe every word Louis Freeh says. Louis Freeh, in my opinion, is one of the honorable people up there. HE: Another thing that Louis Freeh said on August 4 was that he and the attorney general had worked out a procedure by which they reviewed whether national security information developed in the Chinagate task force would be briefed to the National Security Council at the White House -- in other words, to the President. He said that there were some instances in which they decided not to brief the President. You have no reason to disbelieve that? S: I have no reason to disbelieve anything that Louis Freeh says. Let's leave it at that. I'm definitely gagged on anything that I read in that report. HE: I understand. I don't want you to violate any confidence or security agreement. The implication for people who watched closely is that the FBI is investigating the President of the United States for knowingly accepting Chinese money and perhaps there may be a quid pro quo at the bottom of that, and that Janet Reno and some political appointees in the Justice Department are not naming an independent counsel because that would trigger an unfettered investigation. And that they are therefore covering up for the President. Is that a question that you would have pursued in an impeachment inquiry? S: Oh yes. Absolutely. I would have pursued that, I would have pursued the China aspect of it, I would have pursued John Huang and Charlie Trie. I would have gone into Filegate and tried to find out what went on there. HE: You would have investigated whether the attorney general of the United States is actively covering up for the President of the United States in the commission of impeachable offenses? S: Yes. Whether I had read that report or not, we would have investigated that....."

Human Events interview of Schippers 5/28/99 Terence Jeffrey "... S: About anything. We tried to get into the immigration and naturalization problems that we saw and we were told that they weren't going to allow us to see the immigration records. The FBI at every stage of the investigation -- at every stage of oversight, impeachment, or anything else -- gave us nothing but 100% full cooperation from the bureau. The problems always came between the bureau and us because interposed between us was the Justice Department, and they were not about to give up anything that might embarrass the President or the Administration. HE: Your feeling is they were covering up for the President? S: I feel they were covering up for the President. HE: That the FBI, under the directorship of Louis Freeh, and the House Judiciary Committee under Chairman Henry Hyde -- in other words, the Congress -- have been cut out of the investigation of what might be the most significant corruption taking place in government today. S: Absolutely. There is not a person in the Congress who has even been able to read Mr. LaBella's report or Mr. Freeh's report. HE: You're the only person? S: No. One of the Democrat staffers was able to read it with me. And, of course, we were totally gagged. I could only report to Mr. Hyde, personally. ..."

Human Events interview of Schippers 5/28/99 Terence Jeffrey "... HE: What would be the most important direction of investigation? S: If you're talking in terms of obstruction of justice and things like that, that's one thing. But if you're talking about national security, I think there's two keys. I'll let you put them together. One's Chinagate, the other is Filegate. I think they are interrelated and I think they are very important. HE: Getting the FBI files of former Republican officials, in your view, is related to President Clinton's, the Democratic National Committee's, reception of money from China? S: I think getting the files on the Republicans, the raw FBI files, was at the foundation. That was necessary for the big move. HE: And you would aggressively go after the possibility that they willfully took the FBI files of Republican officials for the purpose of intimidating those officials? S: I think they were to be used for whatever purpose they could be used. Some of it might have been intimidation, some of it might have been blackmail, some of it might have been for other purposes. HE: And you would play hardball? S: I would play hardball like nobody's ever played hardball. I already have and got nowhere...."

AFP 6/28/99 "...The Clinton administration was first told China may have stolen US nuclear secrets nine months earlier than it originally admitted, a newspaper said. Throughout the uproar over allegations that China stole secrets to every key US nuclear warhead made since the 1970s, Republicans have claimed the White House failed to react quickly or strongly enough to the charges. The White House says it learned of the possible spying in April 1996. But unnamed current and former US officials told the New York Times the administration was informed of the apparent theft in July 1995....."

The New Australian No. 125, 28 7/4/99 Peter Zhang "... Obviously a member of Chinese intelligence who has just returned from America has far more interesting things to say than a lowly local Party official who spends all day stamping forms...... Something that the American public has not been told, though it is no secret, is that when Clinton, aka "nanren men zai hua sheng dun"1, abolished COCOM (Coordinating Committee for Multilateral Export Controls) in 1993 he outraged the British who warned Clinton that his decision to permit the export to China of high-tech material with military applications would allow Beijing's military machine to leapfrog years of military research and spending and put the West at risk. I cannot say whether 10 Downing Street was really surprised by Clinton's decision but I can say with a considerable degree of certainty that British intelligence was not. It should go without saying that British intelligence gave Blair a complete assessment of Clinton's actions and apparent motives. I suspect this assessment had more to do with London's outrage rather than Clinton's action. But this, I admit, is pure speculation on my part. Nevertheless, that British intelligence has taken a keen interest in Clinton's behaviour, an interest that goes back to his student days, is something that would, in my opinion, have helped alert thinking Americans to the true nature of Clinton's character. What the vast amount of Americans wouldn't know (and might even be appalled by it) is that Special Branch2 supplies British intelligence with dossiers detailing the activities of every foreign student's political activities and has done so for a number of decades. (No wonder the CIA envies the latitude granted to its British counterparts.) .....The irony is that not only did the British know well before the American public that Clinton's action would enable China to buy American supercomputers that would be used to build sophisticated nuclear-guidance systems they also knew the details of those agreements....."

New York Post 6/28/99 Deborah Orin "...The latest revelation by The New York Times that the first tipoff came in 1995 also raised new doubts about the truthfulness of Clinton's claim earlier this year that no one told him of any suspicions of such spying. "A scandal is there, the revelations of Chinese spying, and then starts the cover-up and obfuscation, and that makes it 10 times worse," Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) told Fox News. "Clearly, the White House has not been forthcoming about what the president knew, when he knew it ... There's no doubt that there [were] tremendous lapses or even, frankly, misconduct." McCain's criticism was echoed not just by other Republicans but also by Sen. Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), who said news reports showed that the administration "either knew about it or should have known about it." ..."

The Associated Press 6/27/99 William Mann "...- Senators reacted bitterly Sunday to a report the Clinton White House knew of Chinese nuclear espionage earlier than it has acknowledged. "That really shouldn't go on," said GOP Sen. Orrin Hatch of Utah, who plans to run for president. "I'm sick of it." ...."Looking back at it, this is critical enough...that the president should have been informed. There's no question about it," said Lieberman, D-Conn. The White House acknowledged Sunday it was alerted to suspicions of Chinese espionage in 1995 but did not learn about details until 1996, as the administration has maintained. ....The New York Times reported Sunday that in July 1995, Hazel O'Leary, then energy secretary, told then-White House Chief of Staff Leon Panetta and other officials about evidence that China may have stolen nuclear secrets. Word filtered out to other officials in ensuing months, the newspaper said, citing interviews with current and former officials. It said a new report on the case issued by the president's Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board refers to meetings among Energy Department, CIA and White House officials in the second half of 1995. Sandy Berger, deputy national security adviser in 1995 who now holds the top job, has said he did not tell Clinton of the matter until Berger was briefed thoroughly in July 1997. On Sunday, the White House denied any formal interagency contack over the issue before April 1996, when the Energy Department first briefed Berger. Counsel Jim Kennedy said prior discussions of the matter - such as the July 1995 contact - constituted preliminary and informal notification. O'Leary's talk with Panetta, Kennedy said, was "simply an informal heads-up to the White House." ...."

Section of Appendix of Presidents Foreign Intelligence Advisory Board Report 6/99 Sen Rudman, Chairman of PFIAB "...China obtained by espionage classified U.S. nuclear weapons information that probably accelerated its program to develop future nuclear weapons. This collection program allowed China to focus successfully down critical paths and avoid less promising approaches to nuclear weapons designs. China obtained at least basic design information on several modern U.S. nuclear reentry vehicles, including the Trident II (W-88). China also obtained information on a variety of U.S. weapon design concepts and weaponization features, including those of a neutron bomb. We cannot determine the full extent of weapon information obtained. For example, we do not know whether any weapon design documentation or blueprints were acquired. We believe it is more likely that the Chinese used U.S. design information to inform their own program than to replicate U.S. weapon designs. China's technical advances have been made on the basis of classified and unclassified information derived from espionage, contact with U.S. and other countries' scientists, conferences and publications, unauthorized media enclosures, declassified U.S. weapons information, and Chinese indigenous development. The relative contribution of each cannot be determined....We do not know if U.S. classified nuclear information acquired by the Chinese has been passed to other countries. Having obtained more modern U.S. nuclear technology, the Chinese might be less concerned about haring their older technology...."

Media Research Center CyberAlert 6/28/99 Brent Baker "....At Clinton's late afternoon press conference on June 25 FNC's Wendell Goler, who asked him back on March 19 about spying during his term, pressed: "Let me ask you once again do you still maintain that you were not told anything about these Chinese efforts to spy at the nation's nuclear labs during your administration?" Clinton answered by stressing how spying by China has been ongoing for twenty years, but then he got to commenting how his March 19 reply: "What I said was that I didn't suspect any actual breaches of security had occurred during my tenure. Since then we have learned of the off-loading of the computer by Mr. Lee, from the secured computers into his personal computer. That's something we know now that I didn't know then. But I think my choice of wording was poor. What I should have said was I did not know of any specific instance of espionage because I think we've been suspicious all along. And I have to acknowledge I think I used a poor word there. We have been suspicious all along generally. We did not have any specific instance as we now do of the off-loading of the computer..." Actually, on March 19 Clinton did not say "that I didn't suspect any actual breaches of national security." He answered: "Can I tell you there has been no espionage at the labs since I've been President? I can tell you that no one has reported to me that they suspect such a thing has occurred." And in response to another question he maintained: "To the best of my knowledge, no one has said anything to me about any espionage which occurred by the Chinese against the labs, during my presidency." ....Now to last Friday. Clinton's grudging admission that he misled the American people as "my choice of wording was poor." In fact, he was again misleading people by suggesting that the "off- loading of the computer" is the only specific instance during his watch. But as Paul Sperry pointed out in the June 9 Investor's Business Daily: "The declassified version of the House [Cox] report identifies 11 cases of Chinese espionage since the late 1970s. Eight took place during President Clinton's years in office....In other words, the vast majority of the leaks over the past 20 years have sprung on Clinton's watch....The House report doesn't disclose the full extent of Chinese espionage in the Clinton years. Citing 'national security' reasons, the White House censored roughly 375 pages, including several recent cases." So, the networks had plenty of angles to pursue Friday night, but they bunted: ABC's John Cochran, CBS's Scott Pelley and CNN's John King all ignored China. FNC's Wendell Goler included Clinton's answer in his Fox Report story and NBC's Claire Shipman gave it 24 seconds in a piece about how "Bill Clinton laid out a bold and ambitious agenda for just 18 months left in office today."

WorldNetDaily 6/28/99 Charles Smith "...On June 1, 1999, the acting chief of the FBI's Litigation Unit, Scott A. Hodes, released sections of a still-secret report on Chinese espionage in written testimony submitted in a federal lawsuit by this reporter.... "This document is described as an FBI report dated April 1995, and designated by the Department of Commerce as document #98-02018-OSY1-001, originated and classified 'Secret' by the FBI. Portions of the document contain information responsive to plaintiff's request for Department of Commerce records on the subject, China's Commission of Science, Technology, and Industry for National Defense or COSTIND." .... According to the FBI report, "COSTIND generally oversees a whole host of weapons production corporations with their own needs to collect S&T. It is the primary coordinating control over these corporations and also tasks a wide range of Chinese commercial and research institutes to collect high-tech military and industrial items." In addition, the report shows that known commercial espionage by the People's Liberation Army is directly linked to military and diplomatic espionage. According to the report, "The State Science and Technology Commission (SSTC) is the non-military counterpart of the COSTIND, and like COSTIND it is involved in China's S&T modernization effort. The SSTC largely oversees civilian S&T collection, using the S&T diplomats in the United States as a key collection tool." The secret report was generated as part of the standard counter-intelligence task assigned to the FBI. The report was given to U.S. Commerce officials at a classified level. The report describes both PLA "collection" operations and tools such as "diplomats in the United States." ..."

WorldNetDaily 6/28/99 Charles Smith "...The FBI has come under fire recently for providing poor counter-intelligence to the Department of Energy, concerning PLA espionage involving nuclear weapons. Yet, counter to prevailing opinions, as the report shows, the FBI counter-intelligence team was busy warning the Clinton administration about COSTIND and the PLA back in 1995....Much of the equipment included U.S. manufacturing equipment and U.S. training; thus, not only was the technology exported, but so were the American jobs. Some of the documented transfers include: Rockwell Collins GPS navigation to Shanghai Aviation, a company owned by the PLAAF, for missiles and bombers. Radiation-hardened chips for nuclear warheads, including training for Chinese technicians inside America. Blade cutters and molds for a NORINCO artillery-fuse production facility owned by the PLA. McDonnell Douglas machine tools to PLAAF-owned China National Aero-Technology Import Export Corporation for fighter/bomber production. SUN super-computer to COSTIND-owned Yuanwang Corp. for nuclear weapons development. $100 million of Tandem (now Digital) computers to Great Wall Industries, a company owned by the PLA, for long range missiles and satellites. AT&T fiber-optic communications systems to New Galaxy Technology, a PLA company, for the Chinese Army General Logistics Division. Hughes secure Air Traffic Control systems directly to the PLAAF for "military" air defense. $200 million of Motorola secure radios for the People's Armed Police, the Chinese "Gestapo" that executes dissidents and runs the "Lao Gai" prison camps. Advanced Synthetic Aperture Radar from Loral Defense to National Remote Sensing Center, State Sciences & Technology Commission of China, identified by the FBI and the Defense Department as a PLA missile guidance lab. RSA/Security Dynamics computer security encryption technology to the Laboratory of Information Security, a PLA information warfare lab, under the control of China's Ministry of Trade and Economic Co-operation (MOFTEC) and COSTIND..."

***Media Research Center CyberAlert*** 6/30/99 Vol Four No 116 "...Maybe the Energy Department should hire FNC's Carl Cameron. Tuesday night he showed how he knew about testimony from a counter-intelligence agent that the agent's boss, the Energy Department's counter-intelligence chief, wasn't even aware of. And Cameron added unique TV play for a story on the wires Tuesday and in the Washington Times Wednesday about how a Defense official was transferred pending the outcome of a probe about how the supervisor improperly tried to access the computer files of a whistleblower testifying at that moment on Capitol Hill. In a piece featured on both Special Report with Brit Hume and the Fox Report, Cameron revealed what went on behind the scenes at a House Government Reform Committee hearing last week: "Inadvertently on Capitol Hill last week several lawmakers at a closed door meeting found themselves hearing new allegations of security breaches at Energy Department nuclear labs. Democrats and Republicans say the secret testimony of Energy Department counter-intelligence agent Bob Hensen (sp?) caught them completely off-guard. Lawmakers are mum on the classified details which sources say involve weapons labs, like Los Alamos, over the last five years and may have been part of China's nuclear espionage. "The Energy Department's top spy catcher, who admits security cannot be guaranteed, said he was unaware of his agent's testimony until Fox News told him." Ed Curran: "I'm surprised at your comment. As director of counter-intelligence I think I have a responsibility to know what was said in closed hearings. I have not been informed of Mr. Hensen's comments to anybody concerning security breaches in the past. I would certainly be more than interested in finding out though." Cameron went on to explain that when House members realized what Hansen would disclose he was removed from a panel of officials testifying about reprisals for their efforts to expose security shortcomings and stop dangerous technology transfers. This was the June 24 hearing that all but FNC ignored...."

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...I want you to listen again. I am going to pick up on the incredible but true story of the Clinton Administration's betrayal of national security and the scandalous coverup that continues as we speak. In doing so, I fully realize that the majority of Americans will not believe me. They have continued to believe our President even after he has demonstrated over and over that he has no regard for the truth. Though you would never realize it by listening to the national media or the Clinton spin doctors, the recently released Cox Report has revealed a wealth of information on how the Clinton Administration has undermined national security to simultaneously pursue its misguided foreign policies and self-serving domestic political agendas......On the one hand, there is the mind-boggling story of how the Clinton Administration deliberately changed almost 50 years of bipartisan security policies-relaxing export restrictions, signing waivers to allow technology transfers, ignoring China's violation of arms-control agreements and its theft of our nuclear secrets, opening up even more nuclear and high technology floodgates to China and others-thus harming U.S. national security...On the other hand, there is the continuing coverup-the effort to hide from Congress and the American people the true damage that has been done to national security and the Clinton Administration's central role in allowing so much of it to happen on their watch...."

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...At that time, [March 15] I spoke of six proven incontrovertible facts...and let me repeat them now:

1. President Clinton hosted over 100 campaign fundraisers in the White House, many with Chinese connections.

2. President Clinton used John Huang, Charlie Trie, Johnny Chung, James Riady, and others with strong Chinese ties to raise campaign money.

3. President Clinton signed waivers to allow his top campaign fundraiser's aerospace company to transfer U.S. missile guidance technology to China.

4. President Clinton covered up the theft of our most valuable nuclear weapons technology.

5. President Clinton lied to the American people over 130 times about our nation's security while he knew Chinese missiles were aimed at American children.

6. President Clinton single-handedly stopped the deployment of a national missile-defense system, exposing every American life to a missile attack, leaving America with no defense whatsoever against an intercontinental ballistic missile.

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...First, let us begin with a simple fact: Sixteen of the seventeen most significant major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report were first discovered after 1994. With the lone exception of the breach of the initial design information of the W-70 warhead (the so-called neutron bomb)-which was first discovered during the Carter Administration-everything else was first discovered during the Clinton Administration. Let me repeat-sixteen of the seventeen most significant major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report were first discovered during the Clinton Administration. Those who tell you otherwise are willfully lying to you...."

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...Second, of the remaining sixteen technology breaches, one definitely occurred during the Reagan Administration-the W-88 Trident D-5. Seven occurred sometime before 1995, though it is unclear exactly when. And eight occurred-without question-during the Clinton Administration.

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...The seven that occurred before 1995 included breaches of information on all of the currently deployed nuclear warheads in the U.S. intercontinental ballistic missile arsenal: the W-56 Minuteman II; the W-62 Minuteman III; the W-76 Trident C-4; the W-78 Minuteman Mark 12A; and the W-87 Peacekeeper. In addition, there was the breach of classified information on reentry vehicles, the heat shield that protects warheads as they reenter the earth's atmosphere when delivered by long-range ballistic missiles.

Let me repeat that all of these technology breaches were first discovered in 1995.

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...Next, we move to the other eight major technology breaches revealed in the Cox Report. All of these were not only first discovered during the Clinton Administration, they also happened on Clinton's watch:

1. The transfer of the so-called Legacy Codes containing data on 50 years of U.S. nuclear weapons development including over 1,000 nuclear tests;

2. The sale and diversion to military purposes of hundreds of high-performance computers enabling China to enhance its development of nuclear weapons, ballistic missiles, and advanced military aviation equipment;

3. The theft of nuclear warhead simulation technology enhancing China's ability to perfect miniature nuclear warheads without actual testing;

4. The theft of advanced electromagnetic weapons technology useful in the development of anti-satellite and anti-missile systems;

5. The transfer of missile nose cone technology enabling China to substantially improve the reliability of its intercontinental ballistic missiles;

6 .The transfer of missile-guidance technology (by President Clinton to China) enabling China to substantially improve the accuracy of its ballistic missiles-these same missiles that are targeting US cities;

7. The theft of space-based radar technology giving China the ability to detect our previously undetectable submerged submarines; and

8. The theft of some other "classified thermonuclear weapons information," which "the Clinton Administration" (not the Cox committee) "has determined . . . cannot be made public."

Sen. James M. Inhofe Republican from Oklahoma. "...But as the Cox Report points out, nuclear espionage by China is only one part of the problem. China's efforts to acquire U.S. military-related technology is pervasive. Operating through a maze of government and quasi-government entities and front companies, China has established a technology-gathering network of immense proportions. They are willing and able to trade, bribe, buy, or steal to get U.S. advanced technology-all for the purpose of enhancing their long-term military potential. Their success is often determined largely by our willingness to make it easier for them to get what they want. The Cox Report has shed light on the fact that the Clinton Administration has actually helped China in its technology-acquisition efforts or made it easier for them to commit thefts and espionage. You know the truth is always difficult and controversy is difficult. It is easier to take polls and tell people what they want to hear. But I have to make a decision-whom do I love more, this president or America. That is easy. The following are just some of the things that the Clinton Administration has done. And I want to applaud Cong. Weldon for helping to bring many of these things to light.

1. In 1993, the Clinton Administration removed the color-coded security badges that had been u

sed for years at Energy weapons labs claiming they were "discriminatory"-as if that makes any sense whatsoever. Now just a few weeks ago, in the wake of all these revelations, the Energy Department has reinstated the color-coded badges to tell us it is fixing the problem. But I don't hear current Energy Secretary Bill Richardson talking about who created this particular problem.

2. In 1993, the Clinton Administration put a hold on doing FBI background checks for lab workers and visitors, an action which helped to dramatically increase the number of people going to the labs who would previously have not been allowed to have access.

3. In 1995, the Clinton Administration took the extraordinary action of overturning its own agency's decision to revoke the security clearance of an employee found guilty of breaching classified information. When this happened, it sent a message to employees throughout the Department, that this administration was not serious about countering breaches of classified information.

4. The Clinton Administration deliberately, and many would say recklessly, declassified massive amounts of nuclear-related information in what the Clinton Administration touted as a new spirit of openness.

5. In the W-88 investigation, the Clinton Administration turned down four requests for wiretaps on a suspect who was identified in 1996 and allowed to stay in his sensitive job until news reports surfaced in 1999.

6. In 1995, someone at the Department of Energy gave a classified design diagram of the W-87 nuclear warhead to U.S. News & World Report magazine which printed it in its July 31 issue that year. Rep. Curt Weldon is still trying to get answers about how this leak was investigated and what was determined. He has good reason to believe the investigation was quashed because it was going to lead straight to President Clinton's Energy Secretary.

7. Career whistleblowers at the Department of Energy, who tried to warn of serious security breaches-people like Notra Trulock, the former Director of Intelligence, and Ed McCallum, the former security and safeguards chief-were thwarted for years by Clinton political appointees who refused to let them brief Congress and others about what they knew. Trulock was demoted, but will now get to keep his job. McCallum appears on his way to being scapegoated and perhaps fired for trying to tell the truth.

8. Rejecting advice from his Secretaries of State and Defense, President Clinton approved switching the licensing authority for satellites and other high technology from the State Department to the Commerce Department, making it easier for China to acquire U.S. missile technology.

9. President Clinton granted waivers making it easier for U.S. companies to transfer missile and satellite technology to China during the launching of U.S. satellites on Chinese rockets.

10. In 1994, President Clinton ended COCOM, the Coordinating Committee on Multinational Export Control, the multi-nation agreement among U.S. friends and allies that they would not sell certain high technology items to countries like China. When this happened, it opened the commercial floodgates. Ever since, there has been a wild scramble of competition to sell more and more advanced technology to China. As a result, proliferation has never been worse than it has been in the last six years.

11. In a series of decisions throughout his presidency-and many surrounding the 1996 election-Clinton has consistently relaxed export and trade restrictions on various forms of high technology of interest to China.

12. At the same time, President Clinton has ignored or downplayed numerous China's arms-control violations by not imposing sanctions required by law. So while we're selling more and more high tech to China, China is sending prohibited military technology to countries like Pakistan, Iran, North Korea, Syria, Libya, and Egypt. And what does the Clinton Administration do? Nothing. ..."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...In the latest episode of the Clinton administration's cover-up of its mind-boggling security lapses at our nuclear weapons labs, Secretary of Energy Bill Richardson is now attempting to prevent a top DOE official in charge of safeguards and security from testifying before Congress. Why? ....Because that official, Edward J. McCallum, had made clear his intention to warn Congress and the public of devastating gaps in the security procedures at nuclear storage sites such as Rocky Flats, Colorado, that the Clinton administration has repeatedly, and obstinately, refused to correct. Security at Rocky Flats was so bad, McCallum warned President Clinton in a January 27, 1997 report, that terrorists could easily penetrate the facility and steal weapons-grade plutonium, or construct and detonate a nuclear bomb on the site without DOE security teams being able to prevent it. Budget reductions and other "disturbing trends" had turned DOE security into a " hollow force that goes below the bottom line and makes it more difficult to fulfill National Security mandates," McCallum wrote... In a telephone conversation four months later, McCallum was more blunt. The risk was "extremely high," he told the recently dismissed head of the Rocky Flats security detail, that terrorists could successfully attack the plutonium storage site, unleashing "a little mushroom cloud" over nearby Denver. By all accounts, McCallum's reports angered Secretary of Energy Hazel O'Leary, who not only failed to act on his warnings but consistently reduced the budget for security at the nation's nuclear labs--far below what McCallum and other security officials warned was the danger level. Under O'Leary's stewardship, Rocky Flats cut its security force by 40 percent, allowing prime contractor Kaiser-Hill LLC to improve its profit margin despite an overall reduction in the funds it received from DOE. Indeed, by skimping on security, Kaiser-Hill actually earned performance bonuses from DOE, because its cleanup operations were going ahead on schedule. During the Cold War, Rocky Flats was used to machine highly toxic plutonium into nuclear weapons cores...."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...In a twist that should no longer shock observers of the Clinton administration, almost as soon as O'Leary resigned as secretary of energy in January 1997, she joined the board of ICF Kaiser, the parent of the company that McCallum had cited for poor management of Rocky Flats. O'Leary remains on the Kaiser board today, and her husband, John O'Leary, does consulting work for the group. Kaiser also hired Thomas Grumbley, a former aide to Al Gore who was put in charge of DOE's Office of Science and Technology. At DOE, Grumbley had "harpooned" Kaiser's performance at Rocky Flats, according to Mark Graf, the former security chief at Rocky Flats. Grumbley now works for Kaiser as president of its Environment & Facilities Management Group. In 1997, the House Commerce Committee discovered that Grumbley had funneled lucrative DOE contracts to Molten Metal Technology, after the company had hired Gore aide (and top DNC fundraiser) Peter Knight as its chief Washington lobbyist. MMT executives contributed $50,000 in 1994 to the University of Tennessee to establish a chair honoring the vice president's sister, and in 1995 told Knight they would raise $50,000 for the Clinton-Gore re-election campaign, according to Commerce Committee documents.

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...A former Green Beret colonel, McCallum headed DOE's Office of Safeguards and Security, and detailed his concerns regarding deteriorating security of U.S. nuclear storage and research sites in annual reports to the president. He also sent dozens of memos to his immediate superior at DOE, Joseph Mahaley, who colleagues say backed him and raised the issue of lax security at DOE's nuclear facilities with top DOE management, to no avail. McCallum warned that contractors were slashing the guard force, failing to replace outdated alarm systems, and reducing the number of guard dogs at nuclear storage sites in order to boost profits. Some security systems "were so outdated, we couldn't even get spare parts," a DOE security consultant who worked with McCallum told TAS..."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...At one point, McCallum ordered DOE agents to place surveillance devices at the plant, in order to keep track of security guards believed to have ties to local militia groups. When the guards' employer, Wackenhut, discovered the bugs, it thought a disgruntled former employee was trying to gather information for a labor dispute, and brought in a private security firm to sweep the facility. "That in itself was a security violation," a source familiar with the incident told TAS. "No one but DOE-approved security people should ever have been allowed into a nuclear weapons storage facility."..."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...But the problems raised by McCallum went far beyond physical security and even beyond Rocky Flats. He also warned that, under O'Leary's "get-loose" policy at DOE, routine five-year security clearance reviews were no longer being conducted for lab scientists and other persons with access to nuclear weapons design information (known as "Q" clearances).... "

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...Rocky Flats employees have tried to get management to focus on security problems at the facility for many years. In 1995, Mark Graf and Jeff Peters, senior security inspectors at the plant, finally wrote to Democratic Congressman David Skaggs, drawing his attention to the security deficiencies. In retaliation, Peters was placed on administrative leave, and Graf's workload was stepped up dramatically. A few months later, Graf and Peters sent an eight-page classified memorandum to their general manager and to DOE. Peters eventually resigned in June 1996, after filing a discrimination suit against Wackenhut, the security subcontractor; Graf's case is still in dispute...."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...In February 1997, DOE dispatched a new security director to Rocky Flats, a former Air Force weapons officer and trained engineer, David Ridenour. After just three months at the job, Ridenour resigned "in disgust," sending a scathing letter to then-Energy Secretary Federico Pe. In it he complained of no government oversight--a criticism reinforced by the April 1999 GAO report--and said he had been told not to let security concerns interfere with the contractor's schedule or profits. "In my professional life as a military officer, as a registered engineer and as a technologist with the contractor operating the Department of Energy's Fernald, Ohio site, I never before experienced a major conflict between loyalty to my supervision and duty to my country and to the public," Ridenour wrote. "I feel that conflict today."

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "...On April 19, 1999, Assistant Secretary of Energy Rose Gottemoeller informed McCallum that he had been placed on administrative leave without pay, and was under investigation for having released classified information in telephone conversations that were taped by Mark Graf three years earlier, and which (without his knowledge or consent) recently appeared on an Internet website. (Graf had taken his suit against Wackenhut to the Government Accountability Project, a left-leaning nonprofit organization that provides legal assistance to government whistleblowers.) Gottemoeller also issued a reprimand to McCallum's superior, Joseph Mahaley, but quietly withdrew it after he threatened legal action.

The American Spectator 6/99 Kenneth R. Timmerman "..."All the people who have raised the alarm over DOE security lapses have suffered some form of harassment," one Republican congressional aide told TAS. And Democrats in Congress are just as incensed. Last year, Massachusetts Democrat Ed Markey wrote to Energy Secretary Richardson detailing the lapses and asking how DOE was fixing them. ... Well-informed sources close to the energy secretary say he personally gave the order to fire McCallum in April because he was "pissed off" that McCallum was the source of the information reaching the Hill about loose security at the labs...."

 

Washington Times 6/28/99 Bill Gertz "...China is making final preparations to test fire a new mobile intercontinental ballistic missile that the CIA believes will incorporate stolen U.S. missile and warhead secrets, The Washington Times has learned. Preparations for the launch of the road-mobile DF-31 -- which could take place as early as next week -- were spotted by U.S. spy satellites at Wuzhai in central China and reported in classified U.S. intelligence reports earlier this month, said U.S. intelligence officials familiar with the reports. "They are getting ready for a launch," one official said. The official said one U.S. intelligence agency assessed the DF-31 test missile to be capable of carrying a 2-and-a-half-megaton warhead. A megaton is the equivalent of a million tons of TNT. Other intelligence estimates have said the DF-31 warhead size will be smaller, closer to the 100- to 200-kiloton range that is similar to compact U.S. nuclear warheads. China's two dozen CSS-4 long-range ICBMs each carry a five-megaton warhead and the CIA reported last year that at least 13 of those missiles were targeted on U.S. cities....."

Washington Times 6/28/99 Bill Gertz "...The 5,000-mile-range missile will be able to hit targets in parts of the western United States. According to a report released last month by a special House panel investigating Chinese espionage, the DF-31 is likely to be the first missile in the People's Liberation Army (PLA) arsenal to incorporate stolen U.S. warhead design technology, including either the advanced W-88 warhead, or the older W-70 warhead used on short-range Lance missiles. "The DF-31 ICBM and the PRC's other new generation mobile ICBMs will require smaller, more compact warheads," said the report by a committee headed by Rep. Christopher Cox, California Republican. "The stolen U.S. information on the W-70 or W-88 Trident D-5 will be useful for this purpose." The D-5 is the most advanced U.S. submarine-launched ballistic missile...."

Washington Times 6/28/99 Bill Gertz "... Intelligence monitors, including satellites and reconnaissance aircraft, are watching the Wuzhai site for the test and officials said they will be looking out for whether China makes the jump from a large single warhead to small, multiple warheads. The first flight test of the DF-31 took place in May 1995 and other missile tests showed China's use of "penetration aids" --dummy warheads designed to fool missile defenses. China has been working slowly on the new DF-31 and last tested its rocket motor during President Clinton's visit to China a year ago. The July 1 test, according to some Pentagon officials, was an "ejection test" of the DF-31 missile. Its timing was viewed as a political signal to the United States, coming as it did during the summit, these officials said...."

Washington Times 6/28/99 Bill Gertz "... "The DF-31 ICBM will give China a major strike capability that will be difficult to counterattack at any stage of its operation," states the Air Force report, labeled "secret." "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." The Air Force report contained a map showing the range of DF-31 to be sufficient for it to hit targets throughout the western United States along a line running southwest from Wisconsin through California...."

The American Spectator, page 22 7/99 Kenneth Timmerman "... a recent review by the General Accounting Office (GAO) found that some of the money has helped the Russians develop better nuclear weapons, missiles, and biological weapons--and that many civilian projects financed with U.S. taxpayer money have direct military applications. Even worse: Some of the U.S.-funded scientists and institutes are developing weapons for Iran and Libya. Despite these warnings, the Clinton administration now proposes to spend an additional $600 million to launch a massive public works project in ten Russian "nuclear cities." Although these sites are ostensibly closed to outsiders, Iranian visitors have in the last five years been spotted at some of Russia's most sensitive weapons labs, including Vector and Obolensk, where scientists have genetically engineered human and animal viruses to produce the most deadly biological weapons known to mankind. The GAO concluded in February that the Nuclear Cities Initiative is "likely to be a subsidy program for Russia for many years rather than a stimulus for economic development," and recommended that it be scaled back. It also said the Department of Energy (DOE), which will oversee the program, should more vigilantly check the backgrounds of Russian scientists slated to benefit from U.S. taxpayer largesse, in order to ensure that weapons designers do not enter classified U.S. facilities and do not use U.S. funds to subsidize new weapons development. Heading the Nuclear Cities program at DOE is Assistant Secretary of Energy Rose Gottemoeller, the same official who fired the department's head of security programs because she suspected him of leaking information to Congress on the disastrous state of security at DOE nuclear storage plants and at the national labs ("Nuclear Security Meltdown," TAS, June 1999). In her academic writings, Ms. Gottemoeller has urged the U.S. to abandon its long-standing policy of strategic ambiguity by declaring publicly that the U.S. will not be the first to use nuclear weapons. But Rose Gottemoeller is not just any anti-nuclear academic: In 1993 she became National Security Council director for Russia and the other Soviet successor states. Since then, she has presided over policies that advanced the career of former KGB Director Yevgeni Primakov, turned a blind eye to Russia's nuclear and missile transfers to Iran, and supported President Boris Yeltsin at the expense of democratic reformers, plying him with political favors and cash that went directly into off-shore bank accounts. Although she has no hands-on managerial experience, Gottemoeller inherits a program crippled by poor management and lack of oversight, which seems destined to have precisely the opposite effect of its stated intention of helping wean Russia away from nuclear weapons...."

The American Spectator, page 22 7/99 Kenneth Timmerman "... Even Russian lab directors are complaining that in its naive approach to proliferation, the Clinton administration is making dangerous mistakes. TAS has learned that one Russian lab director warned the director of DOE's Initiatives for Proliferation Prevention (IPP) project in Moscow in November 1996 that U.S. taxpayer money was being funneled into Russia's most dreaded biological weapons facilities, and that, given the way the U.S. had structured the programs, there was nothing he could do to stop it..... The State Research Center of Virology and Biotechnology, known as Vector, was founded in the 1970's to carry out topsecret research into deadly viral weapons. Given all new labs and a new charter by Mikhail Gorbachev in 1987, Vector "weaponized" new strains of smallpox at a time when the World Health Organization declared the disease eradicated worldwide..... Before Alibek defected from Russia in 1992, Vector also developed a new form of the Ebola virus known as Marburg-U, a disease which liquefies the victim's internal organs and causes the pores of the skin to ooze blood from internal bleeding. Vector's state-of-the-art production facility near the Siberian town of Koltsovo continues to receive funds from IPP and the U.S. Department of State, under a parallel program known as the International Science and Technology Centers (ISTC). Vector's programs are still "too sensitive to discuss," say former officials, who voice concern that the State Department has provided general support funds which Vector can use for whatever purpose it chooses. These funds were awarded Vector despite U.S. government awareness that the institute is currently developing new biological weapons for the Russian military, including a new strain of German measles that creates AIDS-like symptoms in a matter of days....."

The American Spectator, page 22 7/99 Kenneth Timmerman "... Of the seven Russian institutes hit with White House sanctions in January for selling missile-related equipment and technology to Iran, most were recipients of ISTC grants, a State Department official supervising the program acknowledges. "Since the sanctions, we have suspended any new contracts with these entities," the official says. One of the entities was TSAGI, also known as the Aerohydrodynamic Institute. TSAGI contracted in early 1997 to build a wind tunnel, at the Shahid Hemat missile plant outside of Tehran, which is being used by Iranian and Russian missile designers to refine the Shahab-3 missile. Successfully test-fired in July 1998, the Shahab-3 gives Iran the capability for the first time of reaching Israel with a nuclear weapon. A follow-on missile, the Shahab-4, is also being developed with Russian assistance, and will be able to target U.S. NATO bases in Europe. The ISTC was planning to fund a TSAGI project involving new aircraft designs aimed at improving wake vortex disturbance, a phenomenon which can cause small planes to crash when they cross the wake of a larger aircraft....."

Jya.com 6/24/99 Testimony of Dr. Peter M Leitner "...To be victimized by my own government - particularly the Defense Department - for consistently putting the near- and long-term national security of the United States ahead of all other considerations is something that I still find astounding to this day. I believe that a deadly combination of corruption, greed, careerism, indolence, and possibly darker motives have brought us to this sad turning point in the nature of the military threats to the United States and along the Chinese periphery - extending from the Central Asian republics through the Indian Ocean and along the Pacific Rim... From 1986 to 1990 I was consistently praised by DoD officials for my effectiveness in documenting and persuasively defending American technology security interests around the world in international negotiations.... In 1994, I wrote a technical paper called "McDonnell Douglas Machine Tool Sales to the PRC: Implications for U.S. Policy" and refused a direct order to change my denial of the transfer of the Columbus, Ohio, B-1 Bomber/MX Missile/C-17 plant to China. This incident was the subject of a recent 60 Minutes broadcast. Later that year I co-authored a study entitled "Transferring Stealth Technology to the PRC: Three Pieces to the Chinese Puzzle." This paper revealed how the PRC was targeting U.S. companies for technology acquisition with surgical precision.... At one point, DTSA attempted to insert a criteria stating that my licensing decisions had to meet with the approval of my supervisor at least 90 percent of the time..... It was in December 1997 that a campaign to further isolate me began - this time to confiscate my office computers, a laptop and a desktop.... About this time, I began to see and issue denials for a large number of export license applications originating with the DoE-sponsored national laboratories - particularly Los Alamos, Sandia, Livermore, and Oak Ridge. These licenses were intended to facilitate the transfer of a variety of high-tech equipment with direct application to nuclear weapons development and testing to the most dangerous entities within the Russian nuclear weapons design, test, and manufacturing complex. I objected then, and continue to object today, to these so-called Lab-to-Lab transfers because there was no evidence of a security plan to protect U.S. technologies from being used against us, there was no evidence that the Department of Energy exercised any credible level of control over these activities, and after meeting with lab officials it was apparent to me that the labs had become entrepreneurial and were creating programs not so much to resolve the fictional "loose nukes" problem as to keep themselves employed and avoid layoffs....In 1997, I witnessed the intentional orchestration by the administration of a series of events resulting in the false certification to Congress that China is not a nuclear proliferant. This provided the Chinese legal access to many nuclear technologies to complement that which the committee so clearly demonstrated they were engaged in stealing...... In August I was called before the Cox/Dicks Committee where I testified on the PRC threat and worked very closely with that staff - providing over 18 inches of documents and hours of follow-on interviews with staff. Ever since these testimonies I have been subjected to, in staccato fashion, one adverse harassing act after another. The most prominent of these are: further lowering of my performance rating, attempts to isolate me from attending meetings concerning nuclear exports -- particularly when the IG's were visiting the interagency meetings pursuant to the Senate inspection request, a trumped-up letter of reprimand, sick leave harassment, a falsified charge of a security violation, and implied threats to charge me with insubordination or defiance of authority. In fact, the DoD IG found that of the 16 DTSA licensing officers I am the only one not to receive a bonus, or an outstanding or superior rating, this in spite of the fact that I am the only person to have authored any technical or policy analyses or to have stood up for DoD's national security mission in the face of interagency obstructionism. All of this happened since my Cox/Dicks testimony. These actions were deemed so serious that Senator Thompson twice wrote to the Pentagon, including to Secretary Cohen, expressing concern for his witnesses. In addition, the Office of Special Counsel has accepted my case for a full investigation of political reprisals and illegal retaliation...... The politicization of the career Civil Service is an extraordinarily dangerous and insidious process that has been more radically advanced during the past six years than at any time since the enactment of the Hatch Act...."

WorldNetDaily 7/13/99 Charles Smith "…Clearly, the Commerce Dept.'s vain attempt in 1998 to dispute the fact COSTIND was not a Chinese Army unit was another White House spin effort that failed. COSTIND, to Defense Secretary Perry, was indeed a military unit, commanded by General Ding and manned by "officers and soldiers" of the PLA. In 1998, the Commerce Dept. denied access to all China-Gate documents, citing national security, on the grounds that they could "neither confirm nor deny" their existence. In response, this reporter filed suit in Federal Court, located in Richmond, Virginia, seeking the withheld information. Previously released information, forced from the Clinton administration using the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA), clearly showed meetings between Commerce officials and COSTIND. For example, one document described an August 1994 meeting in Beijing that included COSTIND General Shen, Commerce Secretary Ron Brown, and Loral CEO, Bernard Schwartz. The evidence showed that the Commerce Dept. was withholding details on "military" exports directly to the Chinese Army. The Commerce Dept. is not authorized to issue export licenses to military end-users… The Clinton/China military relationship included the "Eight Point Plan" to transfer a state-of-the-art air defense system directly to the People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF). The air defense technology transfer to the PLAAF, according to 1998 GAO testimony on U.S. military sales to China, required a waiver signed by President Clinton…."

WorldNetDaily 7/13/99 Charles Smith "…COSTIND operations against the Commerce Dept. included a vast array of U.S. military technology. One deadly example, and a specialty of COSTIND General Huai, was the the export of U.S. super-computers for Chinese Army nuclear weapons research. Commerce Dept. documents show that SUN Corp., a U.S. computer maker, sold a super-computer directly to a Chinese Army nuclear weapons lab at Yuanwang Corp. The documents also show that the Clinton administration knew that Yuanwang was operated by the Chinese Army. Detailed information was given to the Commerce Dept., including the direct PLA contacts at the Chinese weapons labs prior to the sale by none other than COSTIND General Ding himself. According to the Commerce documents, Yuanwang manufactures test equipment for the Lop Nor nuclear weapons facility in China…."


Washington Times/ Investigative 7/13/99 Bill Gertz "…A Los Alamos computer scientist accused of leaking nuclear weapons secrets to China could avoid espionage charges and face prosecution under a computer crime statute, according to Clinton administration officials. Scientist Wen Ho Lee was fired from his job at Los Alamos National Laboratory in April and has been under investigation for months on suspicion he passed secrets to China about the W-88 nuclear warhead. The warhead is the most advanced strategic weapon in the U.S. arsenal. However, Clinton administration officials close to the case said that the FBI mishandled the investigation early on, making a successful espionage prosecution unlikely…"

Washington Times 7/5/99 "…(1) After learning in April of 1995 from their monitoring of Chinese nuclear test explosions that China had apparently acquired classified design information about the United States' most sophisticated nuclear warhead, the W-88, why did Department of Energy (DOE) weapons scientists and counterintelligence officials delay for an entire year -- until April 1996 -- reporting this alarming information to the White House? (2) Given that Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) officials learned of the same development in 1995 as well, why would that agency not advise the White House? Those questions have now been answered. In fact, DOE counterintelligence officials did not wait nearly so long. Nor did their CIA counterparts. As early as July 1995, DOE Secretary Hazel O'Leary conveyed her department's suspicions to no less a senior White House official than Chief of Staff Leon Panetta, according to an article in the New York Times. Within days, CIA Director John Deutch, a former deputy secretary of defense, told Mr. Panetta that the CIA had independently gathered intelligence confirming the suspicions of DOE officials; namely, that China had stolen secret information about the W-88….. In November of 1995, a convinced Mr. Deutch personally briefed White House National Security Adviser Anthony Lake -- who implausibly asserts that he cannot recall the briefing, although the White House acknowledges there is a record of it. In any event, Mr. Lake claims to have failed to brief the president. Moreover, Mr. Panetta, the government official who probably spent more time with Mr. Clinton than anybody else at the time, admitted to the Times that he failed to mention to the president what Mrs. O'Leary and Mr. Deutch told him in July 1995…..Imagine that. CIA Director Deutch informs the the White House Chief of Staff in July 1995 that his agency suspects Chinese nuclear espionage involving America's most advanced nuclear warhead. After the sober-minded Mr. Deutch becomes convinced of the nuclear espionage, he personally briefs the president's national security adviser. Five months later, DOE counterintelligence officers gave then-Deputy National Security Adviser Sandy Berger what they termed an "explicit" and "detailed" briefing. And none of these three --neither Mr. Panetta, nor Mr. Lake nor Mr. Berger -- ever considered the information sufficiently alarming to brief the president. (At one point, within days after the scandal exploded in early March this year, Mr. Berger, who became national security adviser in early 1996, claimed to have briefed the president in April 1996, but the White House now insists the president was not briefed until July 1997, after DOE officials briefed Mr. Berger a second time.) Either these three senior White House officials are among the most incompetent aides ever to serve a U.S. president, a prospect that, admittedly, is difficult to believe in Mr. Panetta's case. Or they are lying…."

The Center For Security Policy 7/2/99 "…On 23 June, Hutchison USA announced its investment of $957 million into the combined telecommunications company of Voicestream Wireless and Omnipoint. Hutchison is already the largest shareholder in Voicestream, owning 24% of the company and its latest investment will increase its ownership to 30% of the newly merged conglomerate….Hutchison USA is a division of the large Hong Kong business conglomerate, Hutchison Whampoa, whose business ventures include real estate, port ownership in Asia, Europe and Panama, retail and manufacturing, and telecommunications and energy projects. Owned largely by billionaire Li Ka-shing, the company has recently initiated an extensive overseas acquisition strategy. Among other companies, Li is also the principal owner of the Panama Ports Company and China Resources Enterprise which collectively control four major ports at the eastern and western entry points to the Panama Canal. In a recent hearing before the Senate Committee on Foreign Relations on U.S. interests in the Panama Canal, a former Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff and Chief of Naval Operations, Admiral Thomas H. Moorer (USN, Ret.) raised an alarm over Hutchison's role -- and that of the Chinese government -- in Panama.

The Center For Security Policy 7/2/99 "…As Adm. Moorer put it: ...There's far more going on [in Panama] then meets the eye. A company called Panama Ports Company, S.A., affiliated with Hutchinson Whampoa, Ltd. through its owner, Mr. Li Ka-Shing, currently maintains control of four of the Panama Canal's major ports. Now, Panama Port Company is 10 percent owned by China Resources Enterprise, the commercial arm of China's Ministry of Trade and Economic Cooperation….. In their best-selling book, Year of the Rat, Edward Timperlake and William C. Triplett III claimed that China Resources "had previously been identified as an associate of Chinese military intelligence." The authors also identified ties between Li Ka-shing and known arms-smuggler Wang Jun, head of Polytechnologies, an enterprise closely associated with the People's Liberation Army.,,,, The Senate [Government Reform] Committee...revealed that Hutchison Whampoa's subsidiary, HIT, has business ventures with the China Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO), which is owned by the People's Liberation Army. COSCO has been criticized for shipping Chinese missiles, missile components, jet fighters and other weapons technologies to nations such as Libya, Iraq, Iran and Pakistan. In 1996, the U.S. Customs Service seized a shipment of 2,000 automatic weapons aboard a COSCO ship at the port of Oakland, California. The man identified as the arms dealer, Wang Jun, is the head of China's Polytechnologies Company, the international outlet for Chinese weapons sales. Jun also sits on the Board of the China International Trust and Investment Corporation (CITIC),(1) the chief investment arm of the Chinese central government. It is also the bank of the People's Liberation Army, providing financing for Chinese Army weapons sales and for the purchase of Western technology. Jun's fellow CITIC Board member is Mr. Li Ka-shing, chairman of Hutchison Whampoa Ltd…."

The Center For Security Policy 7/2/99 "…Li Ka-shing has profound ties to the Beijing regime. Li has invested more than a billion dollars in China and owns most of the dock space in Hong Kong. In an exclusive deal with the People's Republic of China's communist government, Li has the right of first-refusal over all PRC ports south of the Yangtze river, which involves a close working relationship with the Chinese military and businesses controlled by the People's Liberation Army. Li has served as a middle man for PLA business dealings with the West. For example, Li financed several satellite deals between the U.S. Hughes Corporation and China Hong Kong Satellite [CHINASAT], a company owned by the People's Liberation Army. In 1997, Li Ka-shing and the Chinese Navy nearly obtained four huge roll-on/roll-off container ships -- which can be used for transporting military cargo -- in a deal that would have been financed by U.S. taxpayers. A June 1997 Rand report, "Chinese Military Commerce and U.S. National Security," stated, "Hutchison Whampoa of Hong Kong, controlled by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing, is also negotiating for PLA wireless system contracts, which would build upon his equity interest in Poly-owned Yangpu Land Development Company, which is building infrastructure on China's Hainan Island." In 1998, Li Ka-shing attempted to issue $2 billion in bonds, through his Hutchison company, in the United States. According to the Dow Jones Newswire, Hutchison revealed that 50 percent of the bonds would be used through a subsidiary known as Chung Kiu Communications Ltd., which had signed agreements to provide cellular services and equipment to joint ventures between the People's Liberation Army and the Chinese Ministry of Posts and Telecommunications. (Emphasis added.) …"

New York Times Company 7/16/99 David Johnston "…An unclassified summary of the inspector general's report, which was released on Wednesday, found that F.B.I. officials were at first reluctant to share raw intelligence with campaign finance prosecutors, senior Justice Department officials and lawmakers who demanded the information as part of their own investigations. Later, the report said, Justice Department officials provided too much unverified intelligence to lawmakers, fearing that Attorney General Janet Reno and her subordinates could be criticized by Republicans if they failed to turn over information that might be considered relevant to a Congressional inquiry…"

Curt Weldon Charts "...The two charts together reveal, among other things:

* A systematic, well planned effort by the Chinese military at the highest levels to target and acquire technology for military modernization.

* That the targeting effort and financing to acquire the technology and buy influence at the highest levels of US Government were planned and implemented by Chinese military Intelligence through the second department under the General Staff Department (GSD).

* That the Chinese military acquired many of the technologies over the past seven years, although many of them had been targeted for acquisition for more than a quarter century.

* That the Chinese military set up a series of front companies and cut-outs to mask its technology targeting efforts and to launder money to hide its origin. Chinese military intelligence even resorted to the use of companies and bank accounts of the infamous Macau and Hong Kong Chinese Triad for this purpose.

* That even after the US Government learned of the diversion of the W-88 nuclear warhead design in late 1995 into 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, the array of hot section technologies to improve the performance and life of Jet engines, and high temperature furnaces essential for the production of components for missiles and nuclear weapons.

* Despite knowledge of the U.S. designs for nuclear warheads, for example, the Clinton Administration still undertook a serious effort to redefine supercomputers to allow for increased exports of high performance computers to China. Rationale was not based on strategic criteria. Instead, it was governed by economic considerations of a few companies whose executives had supported President Clinton in 1992 and again in 1996.

* A September 1993 letter from President Clinton to Silicon Graphics CEO Edward McCracken, for example, promised to liberalize export controls of computers, machine tools, and telecommunications technologies (attached).

* In another instance, one National Security Council official in March 1998 -- some two years after knowledge of the W-88 and other U.S. nuclear warhead design diversions -- had proposed blanket waivers for satellite sales to China in exchange for China joining the Missile Technology Regime.

* That the Clinton-Gore Administration certified China in January 1998 to receive nuclear technology for being in compliance with non-proliferation regimes, even though there was strong evidence that the Chinese government was continuing its proliferation activities with Iran, North Korea, Syria, Pakistan, and Libya. Such proliferation activities, which were contrary to U.S.-Chinese understandings, continue unabated to this day.

* That the cumulative impact of these targeted technologies now permit China to:

* Develop reliable Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles with insights into MIRVing that ICBM force.

* Miniaturize nuclear warheads.

* Implement a command and control structure for its growing ICBM force.

* Develop an integrated command, control, communications, computer and intelligence encrypted network to enable better military command and control over vast areas, even beyond China itself.

* Improve power projection for its surface fleets, submarines, and long-range cruise missiles capable of hitting not only Taiwan, but also Japan from mainland China.

* Produce more proficient fighter and bomber aircraft capable of greater distances and speeds.

* That the administration as early as 1994 systematically dismantled its system of monitoring the influx of Chinese and other foreign nationals visiting U.S. high technology companies, including our nuclear weapons labs. As a result, there are many tens of thousands of Chinese in the United States and we don't know where they are or what they are doing.

* In fact, it wasn't until this year just prior to public revelations of alleged Chinese espionage in our nation's nuclear weapons labs that the Energy Department decided to seek export licenses from the Commerce Department for foreign national visits. Yet, the requirement had always been law. And where was the Commerce Department in not forcing the issue with the Energy Department?

* The notion that Chinese and other foreign nationals would be allowed access to information or to the facilities where U.S. nuclear weapons were developed is unconscionable. It is seriously doubtful that the Chinese labs would allow U.S. scientists into their nuclear weapons labs.

Softwar 7/20/99 Charles Smith "…Chinese military sources revealed they are now fielding large numbers of neutron bombs. Moreover, Chinese officials implied they would use nuclear weapons, if need be, to take the island nation of Taiwan. No super-power has openly threatened first use of nuclear weapons since President John Kennedy faced the Soviet Union over Cuba in 1962. In response, the Clinton administration opened the way to transfer advanced electronics from the F-15 Eagle and F-16 Falcon to the People's Liberation Army Air Force (PLAAF)…… A Capitol hill defense analyst, who is also a current F-18 Hornet pilot, noted that the Chinese Army Air Force Sukhoi SU-27 FLANKER would be the most likely candidate to receive advanced avionics from the Eagle and Falcon…. The planned transfer would improve the PLAAF Flankers that are already equipped with the deadly AA-11 ARCHER missile system. The Russian built AA-11 missile is capable of out performing the current U.S. Sidewinder missile in air combat. The Archer is reported to be targeted by a helmet sight, allowing Chinese pilots to shoot at U.S. planes simply by looking at them…..According to the Cox Report, in 1996, Hong Kong Customs officials removed a fully operational AA-11 from the cargo hold of a Chinese owned airliner stuffed with paying passengers. What the Cox Report did not relay to the American public was that the missile was in a box mis-labeled as "Machine Parts". What the Cox Report withheld was that the airliner was owned jointly by the Chinese government and Clinton buddy-billionaire, Moctar Riady. What the Cox Report did not release was the Chinese missile was bound for Israel and was to be upgraded with stolen U.S. Sidewinder technology…..

Wall Street Journal Europe 7/20/99 "…The most dramatic example of how overrated America's supposedly invincible superpower status is can be seen today around Taiwan. By law at least, the United States is obliged to defend Taiwan and in a uni-hegemony world you'd think that would be ample deterrence. Instead, we have China openly threatening to "use force" against the island if it sees fit, and accompanying that threat with what Beijing wants us to believe are ominously serious military exercises…. the mind-boggling comments of U.S. Defense Secretary William Cohen when he was asked about the implications of the Cox report and Chinese espionage for U.S. security. China's neutron bomb, a weapon so vile that the U.S. decided not to deploy it? Not news, said a blase Secretary Cohen, and what's the difference if they built it or stole it. China's increasingly sophisticated nuclear arsenal? Oh, we already know China has nuclear weapons, Mr. Cohen pooh-poohed. That's not the problem. What we should worry about is other countries that want to develop or get nuclear weapons. Strange talk, coming from America's defense chief and about a nation known to be an energetic marketer of advanced weapons to rogue states…."

CNSNews.com 7/21/99 "...House leaders are accusing President Clinton of being in violation of a federal law designed to prevent spying against the US by China. In a letter to Clinton signed by House Speaker Dennis Hastert and the rest of the chamber's GOP leadership, they ask the president to comply with the law which requires the Secretary of Defense to produce a list of companies operating in the United States which are controlled by the People's Liberation Army and Ministry of State Security of the People's Republic of China...."

Investors Business Daily 7/24/99 "…By now, President Clinton has to be painfully aware that China's leaders took him for a fool. While he feted them in the White House, their moles mined our defense labs. Now China is threatening Taiwan with a U.S.-designed bomb. Only Clinton doesn't act like someone wronged, which raises even more suspicion that the nation's commander in chief is somehow personally indebted to a totalitarian - and clearly anti-American - regime. He can no longer pretend that his concessions are in ''our national interest.'' Even after its plot to penetrate our military - not to mention our elections - was exposed, China firebombed our embassy in Beijing and held our ambassador hostage. Now it's turning away our ships and planes in Hong Kong. And yet Clinton keeps heaping benefits on the country…Clinton's trade rep is working to get China into the World Trade Organization. Clinton is also trying to loosen controls on sending supercomputers to countries that have resold them to China in the past. He's trying to gull the Senate into signing a treaty to stop the U.S. from ever building and testing another nuclear weapon. China doesn't care about a global test ban, now that it has our nuclear secrets. China is getting another wish: Clinton still won't agree to deploy a missile defense system. Clinton refuses to kill the lab-to-lab exchanges he started with Beijing's nuclear physicists. He has even dispatched his Energy secretary to lobby Congress for more funding. Congress wants the names of Chinese military front companies doing business in the U.S. Clinton won't give them up, even though he's breaking a law he signed Oct. 17. Now he's punishing Taiwan for asserting its independence from mainland China. Pentagon advisers to Taiwan have been grounded. Military aid has been cut off…"

Softwar 7/26/99 "...Over 46 US super computers have been exported to China. Commerce Bureau of Export Administration Director William Reinsch testified in 1997 before the Senate that US officials could not determine the location of many of the computer sold to China. The Commerce Department authorized the additional export of a US super computer in 1997 even though they were denied access to inspect the Chinese site. In addition, Chinese officials denied access in 1998 to US inspectors who wanted to verify the exported super computers were not being used for military purposes...."

Investor's Business Daily 7/27/99 John Berlau "...The Chinese military is getting more than U.S. weapons technology. It's soaking up U.S. money, too. The unanimous House report on technology transfers to China concluded: ''Increasingly, (China) is using U.S. capital markets both as a source of central government funding for military and commercial development and as a means of cloaking U.S. technology acquisition efforts by its front companies with a patina of regularity and respectability.'' ....Investor's Business Daily has learned that some of the funding for companies believed to have connections with Chinese military or intelligence operations has come from America's largest public pension fund: the California Public Employees' Retirement System, or Calpers. Calpers has $159 billion in assets. About a million state and municipal employees depend on it for their retirement. Investments in state-owned Chinese companies could pose financial risks for the retirees as well as national security risks, some analysts warn. IBD showed a list of Chinese companies held by Calpers as of April 30 to Roger Robinson, a director of international economics policy on President Reagan's National Security Council. ''It should cause some concern if they're still holding that paper in light of what are now publicly identified concerns,'' Robinson said..... Robinson says three Chinese companies stand out: Cosco. Calpers held $2.7 million worth of Cosco Pacific Ltd., a subsidiary of the China Ocean Shipping Company, three years after a company ship was caught trying to smuggle illegal firearms into California..... Citic. Calpers held about $18 million in two subsidiaries of the China International Trust & Investment Corp...... China Resources. Calpers holds $8.7 million in China Resources, a holding company some China experts say is often used as cover for spying..... ''Aside from moral implications,'' the report concluded, ''there are potential financial consequences of (investing in companies that aid weapons) proliferation activity, which could negatively impact investors.'' For example, Robinson says, a company tied to a foreign government that's caught illegally dealing in weapons could have sanctions imposed on it by arms-control agencies. Owners of the fund could take a huge financial hit....."

WorldNetDaily 7/28/99 Joseph Farah "...Deep Throat told Bob Woodward back in the Watergate days that to unravel the scandal he should "follow the money." Likewise, we will never fully comprehend the evil and betrayal being committed at the highest levels of the U.S. government today unless we figure out who's getting rich off a cozy relationship with the totalitarians ruling China..... The new company is called China Access Television, or CAC, and it is currently setting up joint ventures with U.S. media and Internet businesses to expand its reach and legitimacy as a "communication company devoted to objectively introducing China, its people, heritage and culture to American society." ....The force behind CAC is CITIC, China's largest commercial corporation and one fully owned by the government in Beijing..... In 1996, the U.S. Customs Service seized a shipment of 2,000 Poly Technologies Co. machine guns destined for agents posing as American drug gangsters aboard a COSCO ship at the port of Oakland, Calif. Wang Jun, head of Poly Tech, is an international arms dealer who had coffee with Bill Clinton and Charlie Trie. Wang Jun also sits on the board of CITIC. CITIC is the chief investment arm of the Chinese central government and the bank of the People's Liberation Army, providing financing for Chinese army weapons sales and for the purchase of Western technology. Wang Jun's fellow CITIC board member is Li Ka Shing, chairman of Hutchison Whampoa Ltd, which will soon control both ends of the strategic Panama Canal.... But here's the Chinese punch line to this practical joke on America's useful idiots. A prominent U.S. businessman involved in a strategic alliance with China Access Television told me the whole program to enrich the party apparatus in Beijing and indoctrinate Americans was dreamed up by -- you guessed it -- the U.S. government. Do you believe this? After Los Alamos? After Riady? After Charlie Trie and John Huang and Webb Hubbell and Loral and on and on it goes. ... Who's getting rich off China? Apparently many are making short-term profits. But in the long term, they're selling America down the drain...."

Reason website 7/28/99 Cox Reports Interviewed by Michael W. Lynch and Jeff A. Taylor 8/9 99 Reason: Your report has been criticized by a foreign policy analyst at the Cato Institute for exaggerating the threat Chinese espionage poses and therefore being a version of the age-old Washington practice: Hype a problem and propose a government solution. Why use the worst-case scenario? Cox: I am always troubled when I find myself in disagreement with someone at Cato. If the object is to spend less on defense, we would be wise to make sure that we are not spending U.S. taxpayer dollars to arm our potential opponents. Our recommendations in here are quite modest. A great deal of our report is simply to have the scales fall from our eyes so we know what we are dealing with. It is not a worst-case scenario.... Not only is the report fair, but it is intended that people will make their own inferences about where to go from here and what to do. If Cato wants to go one direction and Brookings wants to go in another, that's entirely predictable. What I would object to is someone trying to win the argument by saying that these are not facts, because they are...."

Washington Post 8/4/99 "...IN JUST THE past few days, China has illegally seized a Taiwanese ship, sent jet fighters provocatively across the Taiwan Strait, repeatedly hurled threats at Taiwan and its elected president and test-fired a new ballistic missile built in part with stolen U.S. technology. It also has cracked down on a peaceful spiritual sect, rounding up hundreds of members for some old-fashioned Communist "re-education," and has (just on Monday) sentenced two pro-democracy activists to terms of eight and nine years in prison on charges of "subverting state power." The Clinton administration response to all this has been, for the most part, to chide Taiwan and make soothing noises toward China..."

The Tampa Tribune 7/28/99 Tribune Editorial "...The China spy scandal has caused the White House little political damage because the major TV networks, which supply most people most of their daily news, have given it scant attention. ``It was over and done with in two days,´´ says Brent Bozell, head of the Media Research Center. ``Either the print media are making up news, or something very bizarre is going on with the networks.´´ ...There were only five major network TV stories on the Cox Report about the China outrage, Bozell's research reveals. The three- volume spy report, released by a select committee of the U.S. House, listed a series of shocking security lapses. The public outcry was muted because about 70 percent of the public gets its news from a major TV network, and to the networks, the story was insignificant...."

Insight Magazine Vol 15 No 31 8/23/99 Rep Curt Weldon R-PA "...I read with interest Sam Cohen's recent critique of the Cox Committee's report of technology transfer to China released by the Hosue Select Committee on u.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns With the People's Republic of China (see Check Your Facts: Cox Report Bombs,"Insight Magazine, 8/9/99). I expected a more thorough analysis by the self-described "father of the neutron bomb." He should have checked his facts. Let me take one of his most egregious errors and turn it on its head. Cohen delivered a scathing rebuke of the Cox report for publishing a diagram that details the workings and components of the W-87 warhead. Why, Cohen wonders, would the United States publish a detailed, classified design of one of its most advanced warheads in an unclassified congressional report? The diagram in question -- which Cohen says would be a useful blueprint for India and Pakistan -- was actually reprinted from the July 31, 1995 issue of U.S. News and World Report. In fact, the Cox report cites the source of the diagram in captions below and beside the graphic. So this diagram, which "any competent nuclear scientists could use to work back to the actual design" was actually made public four years ago -- on every newstand in the world. How did such classified material find its way in to print and become available to any rogue government with a few dollars to spare the cover price? The answer is shocking. it highlights the utter incompetence and complete lack of concern about national security that have come to permeate the Clinton-Gore Administration...."

Insight Magazine Vol 15 No 31 8/23/99 Rep Curt Weldon R-PA "...The events surrounding the leak of this classified document were related to me by personal sources and independently confirmed by Carl Cameron of Fox News -- one of the few dedicated network reporters who continues to pursue the China story. According to those sources, the leak occurred during an interview that Hazel O'Leary -- then Secretary of Energy -- was conducting with a reporter from U.S. News. According to my sources, O'Leary opened up a ledger of classified documents sitting on her desk and proceeded to show the reporter a diagram of the W-87 warhead in order to prove a point. She then handed the classified diagram of the nuclear warhead to the reporter. Her staff attempted to protest, pointing out that the document was classified. O'Leary hesitated a moment, took the document back from the reporter, crossed out the word "classified" and promptly gave it back to the U.S. News staffer. When the document was published soon after, the Department of Energy and the intelligence community was aghast at the leak. In fact, the Department of Energy launched an investigation to determine the source of the leak and punish the individual responsible. Needless to say, the investigation was quietly put to an end when it was determined that O'Leary was the culprit. As Cohen noted, if he or other lower-level government employees publicly had revealed such details about the workings of the W-87, he would have been severely punished. So would a Member of Congress. But when the culprit is a Clinton-Gore Cabinet official, the incident conveniently is covered up. Like most revelations involving the mishandling of classified information by the Clinton-Gore Administration, the issue was ignored by much of the mainstream press. But that does not make the security violation any less egregious or worthy of punishment...."

Investors Business Daily 8/9/99 "...With those words, Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., described the U.S. government's investigation of Chinese espionage. We'd add words like ''shameful,'' ''pathetic,'' ''criminally inept.'' What remains to be learned is if ''treasonous'' applies. The report details how the FBI and the Energy and Justice Departments botched the probe time and time again. It reads like a how-not-to manual. We realize that hindsight is always clearer, but several mistakes stand out: After an agonizingly slow preliminary investigation, the FBI came up with 18 reasons to suspect Wen Ho Lee, the Taiwan-born scientist at Los Alamos National Laboratory. The bureau sought a warrant from the Justice Department for his arrest. A midlevel Justice official said no. The FBI failed to push for Lee's arrest, even as it was continuing to investigate him. ''The bureau was apparently content to take 'no' for an answer,'' the report said. Justice and the FBI did not realize that the neutron bomb data that China obtained from the U.S. could have come from any number of sites in the U.S. The probe focused almost exclusively on Los Alamos..... This leads us to believe, at the very least, that the culture of the Clinton administration spawned an indifference to U.S. national security -especially where China was concerned. An engagement policy is one thing; coddling a communist country is another. And not caring enough to conduct a professional investigation into whether that communist country got our nuclear secrets is even worse All of which makes us wonder: Was there more than just incompetence at work here? ....."

The Washington Weekly (http://www.federal.com) 8/9/99 Rep Hayword, House of Representatives "...The lead story, Mr. Speaker, in today's Washington Times reads as follows: 'China Tests New Long Range Missile.' Bill Gertz, the byline, he writes and I quote, 'China successfully test-fired its newest long-range missile yesterday amid heightened tensions with Taiwan over pro-independence remarks by the island's President. The CIA believes the DF-31 test launched from a base in central China will be the first new Chinese intercontinental ballistic missile to incorporate stolen U.S. warhead design and missile technology, according to U.S. officials.' Mr. Speaker, when I read those words this morning, I could not help but reflect on the revelations that have rocked our Nation's capital and our entire country in the past several months. The fund-raising scandals, the apparent absence of concern at our Nation's nuclear laboratories, the wholesale theft of our nuclear secrets and the apparent cooperation of some in the private sector, and some in alleged government service to make it so. Mr. Speaker, what perverse pride can anyone derive from these revelations? Is there actually pride on the part of the Clinton- Gore gang and their fund-raisers this morning? Is there actually pride in the heart of Bernard Schwartz, the leading giver to the Democratic National Committee, whose firm, Loral, gave technology to the Communist Chinese? C. Michael Armstrong, the one-time CEO of Hughes, another company that gave technology to the Communist Chinese, can he feel pride at these revelations this morning? Is our national security advisor, Sandy Berger, who sat on this information and apparently withheld it from the highest levels of government, does he feel pride this morning that our Nation is at risk? How proud former Energy Secretary Hazel O'Leary must be this morning, with her socialist utopian vision of sharing our nuclear technology with those who oppose us in the world. And finally and sadly, how proud the President and Vice President of the United States must be. Mr. Speaker, our constitutional republic has survived scores of scoundrels and scalawags, but to have those at the highest level of government speak of a strategic partnership with Communist China and then have it revealed in the fullness of time just what that strategic partnership meant, crass partisan, political advantage through scandalous fund-raising that has led us to this sorry state of affairs...."

Jane's Missile and Rockets 5/99 Seymour Johnson "...Recent US allegations of Chinese spying at US nuclear weapons research facilities may represent only the tip of the iceberg regarding technology-acquisition efforts by the People's Republic of China (PRC), writes Seymour Johnson. These covert and overt efforts are aimed at helping with the development of next-generation systems including improved tactical and strategic ballistic missiles, a land attack cruise missile, and directed-energy weapons for use against aircraft and missiles. They have targeted key technologies such as advanced conventional warheads, terminal manoeuvring and guidance systems, multiple independently targetable re-entry vehicles (MIRVs), reduction of delivery system radar cross-section (RCS), improved launcher mobility, and the military use of satellite systems for functions such as targeting and weapon guidance. US concerns over alleged co-operation between Israel and PRC on anti-tactical ballistic missile (ATBM) systems are well documented but Jane's Missiles & Rockets has learned that the most fertile Chinese efforts may have been in the republics of the former Soviet Union (FSU), coupled with access to commercially available civilian (but potentially dual-use) technology....."I'm not saying they had it all their own way... Russian and Ukrainian governments were on occasion responsive to our concerns... also had their own concerns about losing certain key skills and technical capabilities... I don't think the PRC gained access to Russian 'black' programmes such as high-energy propellants or the use of EM [electromagnetic] modulated plasma screens in low-observable RVs [re-entry vehicles]... but on the other hand they did get a 'head start' with their directed energy weapon programme."...."Consider a relatively unsophisticated SRBM like the 'Tochka-U' [SS-21 'Scarab']formerly deployed by Russia... it could come in at anywhere from 1,000 to 1,800m/sec, with a RCS of less than 0.03m{2}, a terminal angle of between 40º to 85º deg and had provision for a programmed corrective terminal turn of 13g. Now imagine that technology developed over another two decades and applied to MR [medium-range] and ICBMs...."

Jane's Missile and Rockets 5/99 Seymour Johnson "...According to US specialist Richard D Fisher Jr., Senior Policy Analyst at the Heritage Foundation's Asian Studies Center in Washington, one of these new technologies is the integration of Global Positioning System (GPS) updates in China's ballistic missile guidance systems. In particular, Fisher reports that at the Zhuhai Air Show in November 1996, he was told by an engineer from Beijing Research Institute of Telemetry (which is known to conduct research on missile guidance systems) that China was using GPS to improve the accuracy of its DF-15 (export designation M-9) short-range ballistic missile - the type fired during the 1995-1996 Taiwan crisis. The DF-15 was initially thought to be a single stage missile, however recent reports suggest that it may actually have a separating warhead with its own miniature propulsion system. This is significant because it would allow changes to be made to the warhead's terminal trajectory, suggesting that some form of terminal guidance was envisaged for the missile at the design stage...."

Jane's Missile and Rockets 5/99 Seymour Johnson "...The most exotic missile warhead technology known to be on the PRC's priority 'shopping-list' is that of directed-energy weapons. Launched over a decade ago by Wang Ganchang, the 'father' of Chinese nuclear warhead and ballistic missile research, Project 863 covers directed-energy weapons (a field in which the former Soviet Union was pre-eminent), is both well known and well documented outside the PRC. Although the bulk of Project 863 deals with anti-satellite, anti-ballistic missile and anti-aircraft applications, Guo Hezhong (formerly attached to the Electronics Research Institute of China Science Academy) set in motion efforts at developing a high-power microwave (HPM) beam weapon for the suppression of enemy C3I and air-defence assets. The precursor to such a weapon is likely to be the development of a missile warhead incorporating a non-nuclear HPM generator capable of disabling target electronics at greater range and with greater efficiency than an ordinary explosive warhead of equivalent size and weight. In the early 1990s, the US military - with the assistance of some Russian-derived technology - carried out tests of a warhead of this type, and are believed to have modified a number of AGM-86C cruise missiles to carry a developed version of this payload....."

Jane's Missile and Rockets 5/99 Seymour Johnson "...US experts have expressed some doubts as to China's ability to develop such an HPM warhead. While this would be a considerable challenge, it should not be beyond the considerable expertise of Chinese physicists, particularly if given some initial assistance by Russian 'know-how' in areas such as helical explosive flux compression generators (FCGs). Used in the former Soviet Union for both peaceful and military purposes, FCGs provide the extremely high energy density and discharge times (with further pulse-conditioning providing temporal and impedance matching between the FCG and the HPM source) suitable for HPM applications. Such hardware can generally be packaged into the cylindrical geometry required for missile applications. Chinese researchers having successfully achieved pulse power output of perhaps 35-40 million amps with rise times on the order of 100nS, the next and perhaps biggest challenge will be to focus that energy so as to deposit the required amount of energy at the right range and on target. If all the potential problems can be solved, an operational HPM warhead sized to fit a space similar to that available in the nose section of a Kh-55 or Kh-65 missile might achieve an effective range on the order of 300-500m with the pulse directed over a 25º-30º swath. Considerably more powerful effects are theoretically possible with larger explosive generators. The first Chinese HPM warheads could be fielded within the next decade...."

Capitol Hill Blue 8/11/99 Lawrence Morahan "...China's testing of a long-range ballistic missile, its admission that it has the neutron bomb, and its announcement that it would test a new submarine-launched ballistic missile this year vindicate the findings of a congressional select committee, which predicted these developments in a report earlier this year. This was the conclusion of an update, published Tuesday, on the Select Committee on U.S. National Security and Military/Commercial Concerns with the People's Republic of China, an unclassified version of which was released May 25. "Events since the release of the [Cox] Select Committee report have confirmed some of its most disturbing conclusions about the PRC espionage threat facing the United States, the weakness of our efforts to counter it, and the threats to our national security that have resulted from it." "With the stolen U.S. technology, the PRC has leaped, in a handful of years, from 1950s-era strategic nuclear capabilities to the more modern thermonuclear weapons designs," the report said. Events of the past months bear this out...."