Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

The Beijing Connection
BARRONS ^ | September 163h, 2002 | Jim McTague

Posted on 09/14/2002 10:14:28 AM PDT by Axion

Edited on 04/22/2004 11:47:05 PM PDT by Jim Robinson. [history]

The White House recently received a warning about China's possible involvement with terrorists from an unexpected source. House Democratic Whip Nancy Pelosi of California, who opposes military action against Iraq, told President Bush that there are indications that the Chinese are supplying nuclear know-how to some Middle Eastern states. Pelosi is the highest-ranking Democrat on the Select Intelligence Committee.


(Excerpt) Read more at online.wsj.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS:
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

1 posted on 09/14/2002 10:14:28 AM PDT by Axion
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: keri; Nogbad; The Great Satan; Shermy; okie01; aristeides; BlackVeil; piasa; Fred Mertz; ...
Pelosi broached the subject of possible Chinese transfers of nuclear technology to the Middle East. She says her concerns had been elevated by intelligence information, but none that specifically linked China to weapons programs in Iraq or Iran. She notes that China helped Pakistan develop a nuclear program.

Bump.

2 posted on 09/14/2002 10:21:48 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Axion
Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi, Democrat, Northern California may find herself being upbraided by her titular "superior", U.S. Senator Diane Feinstein, Democrat, Northern California, for interfering in Sen. Feinstein's husband's business activities with the Peoples Republic of China.
3 posted on 09/14/2002 10:35:55 AM PDT by elbucko
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
Bump.
4 posted on 09/14/2002 10:41:04 AM PDT by Reactionary
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
Pelosi broached the subject of possible Chinese transfers of nuclear technology to the Middle East. She says her concerns had been elevated by intelligence information, but none that specifically linked China to weapons programs in Iraq or Iran. She notes that China helped Pakistan develop a nuclear program.

So, what is it that she is talking about?

As a member of the Select Intelligence Committee, she is privy to much of the same intelligence that the White House receives.

So, the warning is superfluous if she received it via this channel. Why would she go public with it, if not for some political reason?

On the other hand, if she got a heads up from another channel, why go public with it? If not for a political reason...???

Understand that I use "political" not necessarily in a partisan fashion. It could also have diplomatic implications. Or, perhaps, public information value...

5 posted on 09/14/2002 10:59:18 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
Help me out, here. What Pelosi has said is not exactly secret. Does she have a middle-man in mind other than Pakistan?
6 posted on 09/14/2002 11:30:48 AM PDT by keri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: keri
Help me out, here. What Pelosi has said is not exactly secret. Does she have a middle-man in mind other than Pakistan?

I agree, it's not clear exactly what the purpose of this statement is. Maybe it's simply to remind everyone that China is not our ally, and is, in fact, a behind-the-scenes enemy. Maybe she's saying that China, rather than Iraq, is the prime state sponsor of terrorism (she apparently opposes war with Iraq). Maybe she's warning us that we'd better be careful in war with Iraq and Islamic extremism, on the theory that we're really taking on China.

I don't know. What do you think?

7 posted on 09/14/2002 11:42:47 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: okie01
Good questions. See #7 above for some thoughts.
8 posted on 09/14/2002 11:43:50 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
I really don't know what to think. She said Middle Eastern States. Is she making a leap, maybe implying China is helping the Mid-East develop nuke technology because they helped Pakistan? Or, does she have something much more specific? I have no idea.
9 posted on 09/14/2002 11:55:51 AM PDT by keri
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell; keri
The more I think about it, the more this diversion reminds me of a cul-de-sac in a maze...

An offhand, uncalculated remark from a hysterical woman?

10 posted on 09/14/2002 11:58:28 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: okie01
An offhand, uncalculated remark from a hysterical woman?

I don't know that much about Nancy Pelosi, but I have had the impression of a savvy politician who thinks about what she says. She holds a position of influence in the House, and I generally think it's a mistake to dismiss statements by such people. (It doesn't mean we have to take those statements at face value, of course.)

11 posted on 09/14/2002 7:48:48 PM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: elbucko
You just read my mind.
12 posted on 09/14/2002 8:01:01 PM PDT by Wait4Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: okie01
I highly doubt that she knows things that President Bush doesn't. Releasing it to the press says all I need to know about her "sources"...she is trying to divert attention from Iraq with a "they all do it" strategy. Her "source" is probably the anti-war NY Slimes. I don't trust her. She is still saying Bush hasn't made his case, even with all she knows. These RATS are all going to have major egg on their faces as the days unfold.
13 posted on 09/14/2002 8:04:26 PM PDT by Wait4Truth
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
The sudden introduction of China into the discussion, literally out of left field, is a little jangling.

We've all been playing "Kremlinologist" for about a year now -- making hash out of scraps and leftovers. But this one baffles me. If there is a reason why, I can't imagine what it might be...

Odd outlet, too. Why Barrons? Of course, it could be that the reporter picked up on a throwaway comment and, it being news to him, blew it all out of proportion.

14 posted on 09/14/2002 8:09:28 PM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 11 | View Replies]

To: okie01
The sudden introduction of China into the discussion, literally out of left field, is a little jangling.

I don't find the idea surprising. I've been wary since 9/11 that China might conceivably have had some sort of involvement, that it's a possibility we should be aware of and watch for, and I've posted on this subject before.

Many people have expressed disbelief in the possibility of Chinese involvement, on the principle that China has its own problems with Muslim separatists in the western part of China. But, in fact, China would stand to gain from a protracted war between the U.S. and the Muslim world. (I'm not referring to a war with Iraq here, but a war with loosely-organized Islamic extremists across much of the globe.) The Chinese may be thinking that they could sit back and watch while their two main enemies weakened one another.

So the thought is that the Chinese might be providing support to the Islamic terrorists, egging them on, at the same time thinking of those terrorists as patsies in the long run. The Islamists, for their part, would be under no illusions about the Chinese, but they are willing to take assistance when it is offered, figuring that they can bite the hand that feeds them when the time comes. (The mujahideen in Afghanistan were happy to accept U.S. support in their war against the Soviet Union.)

China has been quite aggressive in recent years. There were rumors about a Chinese nuclear threat on L.A. The Chinese have been quite forward in espionage and otherwise getting inside information from our government. And one interesting point: the Chinese precipitated a major crisis in their relations with the U.S. in Spring, 2001, when their fighter crashed into one of our planes; notice how the timing couldn't have been better to distract our intelligence services and our military -- just at the time that the 9/11 plot was being turned into reality.

China also has a long-term interest in unconventional warfare, including recently cyberwarfare.

The Chinese people, although not terribly fond of their government, are nationalistic. The Chinese were genuinely outraged when the U.S. bombed the Chinese embassy in Belgrade -- which, by the way, they uncharacteristically never retaliated for in any obvious fashion.

In any event, I don't think this report really is coming out of left field. Nancy Pelosi may be speculating along the lines I've outlined above, and she is privy to information which I'm not.

Odd outlet, too. Why Barrons? Of course, it could be that the reporter picked up on a throwaway comment and, it being news to him, blew it all out of proportion.

Yes, I agree that this is possible. But I'm still suspicious of China, for the reasons outlined above.

15 posted on 09/15/2002 1:10:19 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 14 | View Replies]

To: keri; Nogbad; The Great Satan; okie01; Shermy; aristeides; BlackVeil; piasa; Fred Mertz; ...
She said Middle Eastern States.

That reminds me of this recent article [my emphases in boldface]:

Libya leads Arab race for nuclear bomb - Sharon

By Ross Dunn, Herald Correspondent in Jerusalem
September 6 2002

Libya will become the first Arab country to develop weapons of mass destruction, Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, has claimed.

He said he believes that, with Iraqi help, Libya is developing nuclear weapons and long-range missiles that pose a threat to Israel.

"Iraqi experts are running the show in Libya," he said on Israeli television. "There might be Saudi money involved and there is definitely an involvement of North Korea."

He amplified his remarks in other interviews.

"Libya is working hard on developing an atom bomb and is apparently the Arab country furthest along in this," Mr Sharon told the Hebrew daily newspaper Ma'ariv.

"For a long time we suspected they were working on this, but a few months ago, we were given final confirmation of this. They are progressing all the time."

Mr Sharon added:

"It is clear that there are Iraqi experts there, but it is not clear if the Iraq experts are there to develop the Iraqi bomb, and thus evade inspection, or if they are working for Libya."

Israel assumed that Pakistan, which Mr Sharon said had helped work on an atomic program in Iran in the past, was also involved.

It appeared that funding might have come from Saudi Arabia, he said, but this had not been verified.

Mr Sharon's warning about Libya was in contrast to a more positive message about Israel's most immediate neighbours. In a series of interviews timed for the start of the Jewish New Year, he said that for the first time he felt peace with the Palestinians was possible.

"I see the chance for a breakthrough, for a political arrangement, he said.

But the grim tide of terror rolls on.

Two bombs were discovered this week outside the home of the former prime minister Ehud Barak, and Israeli security forces intercepted a car carrying 600 kilograms of explosives en route to stage an attack.

16 posted on 09/15/2002 2:39:54 AM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
"But I'm still suspicious of China, for the reasons outlined above."

I'm aware of your speculations about Chinese involvement in terrorist activity, behind the scenes. And you've developed the thesis quite well in your response.

The Cold War was often, nay, usually, fought with surrogates. The Soviets refined the technique and the ChiComms would doubtless be warm to the idea of "indirect" warfare, themselves.

While I grant there is a very good chance that Red China is somehow involved at some level -- at least as a cheerleader and willing source of supply -- the Pelosi story still baffles me. Why now? Why her? Why Barrons? Why, at all?

It's enough to make the antennae quiver. But, in that I can't divine any useful purpose, I'm disinclined to grant much weight to it. A "sport", a random item of informational static...just one piece of a puzzle that has no apparent form, shape or color. If, however, we should come across a complementary piece of the puzzle...

17 posted on 09/15/2002 11:59:12 AM PDT by okie01
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: okie01
While I grant there is a very good chance that Red China is somehow involved at some level -- at least as a cheerleader and willing source of supply -- the Pelosi story still baffles me. Why now? Why her? Why Barrons? Why, at all?
It's enough to make the antennae quiver. But, in that I can't divine any useful purpose, I'm disinclined to grant much weight to it. A "sport", a random item of informational static...just one piece of a puzzle that has no apparent form, shape or color. If, however, we should come across a complementary piece of the puzzle...

I agree with you. There really was nothing new in what Pelosi said, and she might not even have expected it to be picked up by the reporter (especially for Barrons, as you say).

It's probably just part of a general hard-line stance on China that Pelosi wants to convey, but her statements are presumably consistent with what she knows, without actually releasing any confidential material.

18 posted on 09/15/2002 12:20:34 PM PDT by Mitchell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: Mitchell
Good points on China. I was aware that you did voice suspicions in that direction, and only began to think about it myself in recent days. I have another point to add. China has a border with Afghanistan, and was in direct contact with Bin Laden. I read reports that he had sold them an exploded cruise missile, and bits of exploded ones, after the US raid on him.
19 posted on 09/15/2002 1:12:23 PM PDT by BlackVeil
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: okie01
No. She's absolutely right.

China has aided Iran's nuclear program for a long time.

It is dual use.

They also ship chemicals to Iran and other ME nations used for chemical warfare.

20 posted on 09/15/2002 10:49:10 PM PDT by tallhappy
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-22 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson