Posted on 12/14/2001 9:26:40 PM PST by Hopalong
History and other information about China's little-known Muslim population
China's Muslim Hui Community: Migration, Settlement and Sects by Michael Dillon. Pub: Curzon Press, Richmond, UK, 1999. Pp: 208. Hbk: UK40.00.
By Leila Juma
Twenty years ago, few Muslims realised that they were huge Muslim communities in what was then Russia. On western-drawn maps, the Muslim areas of Central Asia - which have gained 'independence' by default after the collapse of the Soviet Union - were all shown as part of communist Russia and effectively divorced from the 'Muslim world'. A few better-read Muslims knew that Russia had a 'Muslim minority', but that was about the extent of our understanding.
Far greater awareness of Muslim populations around the world has been one of the benefits of 'Islamic revival' since the Islamic Revolution in Iran. There remains, however, a general ignorance about the Muslim community in China which is similar to that of the Muslims under Russian rule 20 years ago. People have become aware that the Muslims of north-western China are in fact Central Asian Muslim peoples living under Chinese occupation - as Muslims of other parts of Central Asia lived under Russian occupation for most of this century - and that there is a growing jihad against Chinese rule in these areas.
What is not generally realised is that there is also a far larger community of indigenous Chinese Muslims living in China proper, the descendants of both Central Asian settlers in China, and of Chinese people who converted to Islam centuries ago, under the influence of Muslim settlers, traders, ulama, teachers and others who travelled through the country or settled there during the period when Muslim countries represented the leading edge of world civilization. It is these Muslims, ethnically indistinguishable from the rest of the Chinese but with a very distinct cultural and religious tradition that has developed over centuries, which has been studiously maintained despite the aggressive atheism of the communist period, that are known as the Hui, while the non-Muslim Chinese are known as the Han.
Michael Dillon, a lecturer at Durham University in Britain, is an established student of the Hui Muslims. His 1996 book China's Muslims, part of the Oxford University Press 'Images of Asia' series, is an excellent short book on the subject. (The pictures with this review are taken from it.) His new book China's Muslim Hui Community, pulls together much of what other writer's have discovered about the Hui, with his own research.
The main section of the book traces the history of the Hui from the earliest days of Islam in China, to the present day. Unlike some writers on the subject, Dillon emphasises the importance of settlement in the origins of the Hui ahead of the conversion. He links the migration of early Muslims from Persia and Central Asia to earlier migrations by pre-Islamic peoples, which seems tenuous. He emphasises also the importance of the Ming period (1368-1644) for the emergence of the Hui as a permanent community rather than an immigrant one, and traces the stories of key early Muslim leaders, many of them warriors who helped the rise of Ming rule.
Dillon also continues his survey through Manchu rule and into the present century, tracing the changing role of the Hui in society and, in particular, the emergence of Sufism. He has a detailed chapter on the Hui 'insurrections' in the nineteenth century, through which Muslims tried to establish Islamic rule in key areas. These jihad movements, which lasted for decades and established functioning states in parts of China, were brutally suppressed, with the Muslims virtually exterminated in many areas. However, Dillon does not elaborate on the impact this had on the Hui, focusing instead on individual experiences and episodes rather than the larger picture. The same is true of his discussion of the present century.
The second main section focuses on Sufi orders in China, and is informative and detailed; however, Dillon's knowledge of China is not matched by his knowledge of Islam; hence errors such the statement that the word 'Salafiyya' derives from the Arabic 'sharif'. Despite the obvious breadth of Dillon's research, such errors raise doubts.
This book is a useful survey on a subject which few people know very much about. This compensates for its shortcomings. Muslim readers will find much of it informative and fascinating, but it should not be taken as authoritative. However, t he sad and unavoidable fact is that Muslims have no place else to go for such knowledge at this time.
Muslimedia: February 1-15, 2000
OKC, please take no offense, I just can't buy that elder Bush did any of what Cohen assumes.
I must say up front, that I'll have to read everything in this thread throughly, very throughly before I can post the basis of why I reject Cohen's assumpations - - I have not read all the posts/all the links provided in this thread, but I'll start today. There is a huge amount of information and links in this thread, it'll be a day or two I'd say.
For instance, I use timelines to analyze all kinds of information from the Downside Legacy, but what goes into my timelines are obviously at my own discretion. I choose to not put opinions on my timelines unless there is a ‘smoking gun’ fact that makes it significant to me. A ‘smoking gun’ is defined only by my own, personal analysis.
As an example – in the timeline at #56, every item is a fact except for one blurb about when William Perry probably met General Ding Henggao. The ‘smoking gun’ to me was Perry’s ongoing efforts under both the Carter and Clinton administrations to share military information with the Chinese and his military-industrial efforts involving General Ding (lobbying the NSA, Galaxy New Technology, Hua Mei, etc.)
I consider William Perry to be an important figure in determining how the Chinese obtained U.S. technology secrets because it culminated in October of 1994 when Defense Secretary William Perry signed the agreement with COSTIND chairman Lieutenant General Ding Henggao to provide for technology transfers from the U.S. to Beijing under the "U.S.-China Defense Conversion Commission." Perry was on the board of both United Technologies and Boeing ($18.5 billion in Chinese sales by 1999.)
I looked for, and did not find, a comparable 'smoking gun' for George H.W. Bush.
Once again, my timelines are not meant to invalidate or diminish anybody’s opinion.
" where he describes in detail how Bush Senior gave the Chinese and French the neutron bomb technology AFTER Bush ordered the US neutron bomb components to be depleted (Sept 27,1991)."
I made a huge booboo when I typed AFTER. I meant to write BEFORE. I need an editor!. I apologize.
The French got the neutron bomb in the late 1970's and the Chinese in the mid 1980s when Bush Senior was Vice-President. Cohen refers to his belief that the transfer of US neutron bomb tech to China was made during the Reagan-Bush administration.
I wrote this in my reply #65 to you where I wrote what I actually intended.
"Second, it was in Sept 1991 that Bush unilaterally dismantled US neutron weapons (FACT) after he I believe (opinion based on Cohen analysis and statements) HAD already given the neutron bomb to China. The "HAD" refers to the 1984-1985 time frame with Lee and is well before 1991. Go back and read more closely. I am not changing my position. It was ten years ago when Bush made his speech but 17 years ago when the Chinese got the neutron bomb tech from the US I believe.(opinion)."
You said therefore I don't believe any of what Cohen has stated.
Nor did George Putnam over the last few years wherein he refused to believe him and actually considered Cohen, a clear patriot before, verging on being a traitor. (The referenced remark George, though, has recently brought Sam Cohen back onto his radio show.)
What do you say explains how the ChiComs got the neutron weaponry, scientists talking? Independent development?
Now, and separately, what is your explanation for the Bush-x41 eliminating all the tactical nuclear weapons in 1991 as Uncle Bill well documents in #49 above? It definitely is the singular event that wiped out the neutron bomb program and that perturbed Sam Cohen. (I would think that act by Bush-x41 was wrong and significant in showing Bush's favoritism toward the Chinese military development.)
BTW to bring things up to more recent events, Sam Cohen and suppoorters have approached the Bush-x43 administration to suggest that the remanufacture of older nuclear weapons could, in a week's time, produce neutron weapons. Apparently the admin listened to the suggestions, but we have no public acknowledgement of a response one way or the other as far as I am aware.
Link: http://www.manuelsweb.com/sam_cohen.htm
“Evidence exists that China has neutron bombs stockpiled, and that the United States GAVE the Chinese the technology to build them.”…….
“Before, an obstacle to creating a nuclear bomb was the need for plutonium, which when exploded could create a fusion reaction in hydrogen atoms. But red mercury has changed that. The cheap substance has been produced in Russia, Cohen said, and shipped on the black market throughout the world.
Cohen said that when U.N. inspectors went to Iraq to examine the Iraqis' nuclear weapons capabilities, the U.N. team found documents showing that they had purchased quantities of red mercury. The material means a neutron bomb can be built "the size of baseball" but able to kill everyone within several square blocks.”
I wrote earlier in one of my replies that China could give suitcase neutron bombs to terrorists. Cohen makes reference to baseball sized neutron bombs (that can fit into a suitcase) made from red mecury and it is very likely China now has made and tested them.
And Iraq is working with China on weapons that use Red mercury and that can be used to make baseball sized (suitcase) neutron bombs. Iraq could give neutron bombs to terrorists too (AlQaeda,and …) if Iraq has succeeded in learning how to build them from China. This is another reason to consider doing something about Saddam Hussein and his weapons of mass destruction.
There is another example of where Bush Senior helped build up Iraq with weapons of mass destruction before the gulf war-Bush personally approved dual use nuclear weapons exports from the US to Iraq (Congressman Gonzales read Bush’s approvals from the floor of the Congress on TV just before the gulf war and I saw and heard it). And Bush in my opinion gave neutron bomb tech to China who in turn is in a position to give it to Iraq to give to terrorists to use against the US.
Please see reply #89.
Also are you aware that Win Ho Lees' wife worked for the FBI? I am sure of this. It was in several articles on the FR and I also spoke to Jasper of the New American about it personally and he had learned ot it independently.
At the moment we are still learning of reported WMD materials in Afghanistan.
Red Mercury comes back into the discussion. Once it was a metaphor for disinformation. Is that really a compound containing an isotope of Hg?
Events once again may be about to overshadow the history.
Yes, I believe that is a matter of much public record that she cooperated with the FBI in the middle of Wen's employment at Los Alamos.
See this merury article.
Sylvia Lee (Wen Ho Lees wife) worked for/with BOTH the FBI and CIA:
From the same article you quoted in reply #95 ("this mercury article"):
But her role was approved by the Los Alamos lab director and the FBI, said Vrooman. ''Some people say she inserted herself. And that is truly unfair,''Vrooman said. ''She was asked to do it.''
Sometime during the mid-1980s Sylvia Lee's relationship with Wofford began. According to people in a position to know, she was providing the CIA with the same type of information SHE WAS GIVING TO FBI AGENT DAVE BIBB, THE COUNTERINTELLIGENCE OFFICER SHE REPORTED TO AT LOS ALAMOS: names of scientists, lists of those attending seminars, copies of documents. In CIA jargon, Sylvia Lee was a ''support asset.''
Peter Lee spent a lot of time on the phone to Wen Ho Lee when Peter was at Lawrence Livermore Labs. Is it not interesting that Peter Lee is alleged to have provided China with neutron bomb technology at a time when Wen Ho Lee's wife was working for the CIA and FBI (don't you know that Wen Ho knew his wife was working for the CIA when Wen Ho was talking to Peter Lee??)
I maintain that Peter Lee likely passed the neutron bomb tech to China with the knowledge and participation of Bush Senior , some in the CIA and pehaps even with Wen Ho's knowledge.
Wen Ho Lee was taped when he made a call to Gwo-Bao Min in 1982 (after he was either forced to resign or was fired – again there are conflicting reports.) Gwo-Bao Min was being wiretapped under the sting operation “Tiger Trap” which reportedly snared a “lot” of would-be nuclear spies.
I have seen no reports of Peter Lee and Wen Ho Lee calling one another. Sylvia Lee, on the other hand, went to the same school with both Peter Lee and Gwo-Bao Min, which the report said is not unusual because it is a large school in Taiwan, as I recall. I have not yet seen any social relationships between the various Lees and Min mentioned anywhere. But, of course, I will continue to look.
There is some confusion also on what exactly Peter Lee passed on to the Chinese in 1985, but whatever it was, at least some of it was declassified in 1993 and that fact had some bearing on the reduced sentence (#61.) Gertz and a few others say it was related to the neutron bomb, however other reports say it was related to his specialty area - laser fusion - which reportedly is used in bombs.
All the reports I’ve read agree however that Gwo-Bao Win was suspected of passing neutron bomb information to the Chinese during the Carter administration. And the reports consistently indicate that he was a target of “Tiger Trap.” Notably, no charges were brought against Win. One report (quoted above at #61) indicates that the FBI was protecting its source.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.