An AWESOME article by Senator Helms and confirms many of TB2K's suspicions, though we're sometimes at odds at whom we should be pointing the finger at. I think Sen. Helms is "right on the money" on this one. Probably why Pres. Bush is being so painfully careful regarding retaliation...

http://www.washingtontimes.com/commentary/20011014-85295120.htm Beware China's ties to the Taliban

Jesse Helms

The deadly attacks on the United States in New York and Washington prompted some suggestions that the U.S. must work with Communist China to combat international terrorism. This is a badly misguided proposal that merits a hasty burial. Given the resolve the Bush administration has displayed toward China to date, it is unlikely to fall into this trap.

The very notion that the United States needs Chinese assistance is based on the flawed assumption that as a member of the U.N. Security Council, China's acquiescence somehow becomes essential to the adoption of a resolution approving the use of force against whomever the U.S. deems responsible for the attacks in New York and Washington. To the contrary, nothing could be more disastrous.

We have been down this U.N. road to disaster before. During Operation Desert Shield, the United States sought the approval of the Security Council to use force against Saddam Hussein, but the resolution that was, in fact, adopted, approved the use of force only to expel Iraqi forces from Kuwait, nothing more.

The very nature of that resolution tied the hands of U.S. forces and was one of the justifications used for stopping Operation Desert Storm with the Iraqi Republican Guard intact and Saddam still in power.

That was a mistake that has been regretted to this day, and now that the forces of international terrorism have struck New York and Washington, the U.S. cannot afford to waste time and energy consulting the United Nations.

The second rationale for working with the Chinese is the weird assumption that China and the United States share a common interest in fighting terrorism.

What a naive and dangerous fantasy.

The fact is, the Communist Chinese government is in bed with every one of the terrorist and terrorist-supporting rogue regimes (is it not now time that we dispose of the laughable "countries of concern" nonsense?) of the Middle East.

China's alliance with major rogue regimes has been so extensive and so well known for so long that it is absurd to pretend otherwise. Indeed, it is equally absurd to expect assistance against terrorism from a regime that has supplied nuclear and missile technology to Pakistan and Iran, chemical weapons materials to Iran, missile technology to Libya and air defense equipment to help Iraq shoot down U.S. pilots, all of which China has done.

Less well known is that the Chinese government is one of the foremost benefactors of Afghanistan's ruling Taliban, the focus of so much of U.S. attention since Sept. 11. Moreover, China is the largest foreign investor in Afghanistan.

On Sept. 11, Pakistan's Frontier Post reported that the Chinese and Afghani governments had signed a new economic and technical cooperation agreement. A defense cooperation agreement was signed in 1998 after Taliban officials allowed Chinese scientists to inspect unexploded cruise missiles that had been fired on Afghanistan in retaliation for Osama bin Laden's attacks on U.S. embassies in Africa.

Those who imagine that the U.S. shares common interests with the Chinese in combating Islamic-based terrorism most likely base their assumption on China's fight against supposed Uighur terrorism in Xinjiang Province, formerly known as East Turkestan.

But there is an ugly catch to that: If the U.S. should end up receiving any kind of support from Beijing for our anti-terrorist efforts, it will almost certainly come at the price of acquiescing in China's crackdown on the Uighurs (as well as its attempts to crush Tibet and isolate Taiwan).

That would be a moral calamity, for there is no justification in lumping the Uighurs with the murderous fanatics who demonstrably mean us harm. The Uighurs are engaged in a just struggle for freedom from Beijing's tyrannical rule, for the most part peacefully. For this, they have been viciously suppressed, with the Chinese government arresting and torturing political prisoners, destroying mosques and opening fire on peaceful demonstrations.

The goals of the United States are clear. Having been attacked, America properly seeks to punish and deter fanatical, mostly small, Islamic groups and their state sponsors. China, on the other hand, has two goals, both utterly incompatible with ours.

Internally, the Chinese government is at war with all of Islam. As a religion, and as a means of organizing and inspiring people, Islam represents a mortal threat to Chinese communist rule. Externally, China's ultimate goal is to destroy America's status as the sole superpower in the world.

To the Chinese government, this is a zero-sum game: anything that embarrasses, diminishes or bloodies the United States automatically serves China's interest. (Witness the nationalistic glee, assiduously stoked by the Chinese government, that was on display on the Internet in China in the wake of the attacks.)

In its anti-U.S. effort, the Chinese government finds the Islamic rogue regimes of the Middle East to be useful allies.

Strategically and morally, the United States cannot and must not assume that China is part of a solution to terrorism. Indeed, Communist China is a very large part of the problem.

Jesse Helms of North Carolina is the senior Republican on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

Fair use, for educational purposes.

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001

Answers

I'm not sure how credible a source Insight magazine is (so far, it seems pretty good to me, but I don't check often), but here's another interesting article re: China's shenanigans, and the possibility of Cuba having chem/bio weapons as well...

http://www.insightmag.com/archive/200111059.shtml

Castro: The Terrorist Next Door

By Paul Crespo

In the rush to pursue terrorists in far-flung places such as Afghanistan and the Persian Gulf region, let’s not overlook another terrorist on our doorstep — Cuba’s Fidel Castro, a dictator with a bankrupt economy, a long history of ties to terror groups, hatred for the United States and a bio-warfare capability.

In 1959 Castro expressed his passionate belief that he was destined to lead an anti-American crusade. “I am going to launch another much longer and bigger war against them. I realize now that this is going to be my true destiny,” he wrote.

Castro’s myriad of agents operating in the United States include a military-spy ring known as the “Wasp” network, recently uncovered in Miami. That group had a dramatic addition on Sept. 22 with the arrest in Washington of a senior U.S. intelligence officer — the Cuba analyst for the U.S. Defense Intelligence Agency. She is the highest- ranking officer ever accused of spying for Castro and had considerable input into recent Defense Department reports minimizing the Cuba threat.

Some argue that the aging Castro now is more interested in the tourism trade than the terror business, but this is a dangerous delusion; he is interested in both. Castro may be less active, but Cuba still is one of seven nations (along with Iran, Iraq, Syria, Libya, North Korea and Sudan) on the State Department’s list of terrorist states. This status is well deserved. In 2000, the State Department reported, “Cuba continued to provide safe haven to several terrorists and U.S. fugitives.” Afghan nationals detained in the Cayman Islands in the wake of the Sept. 11 attacks reportedly transited through Cuba; two others detained in Panama for their possible financial connection to Osama bin Laden’s terror network reportedly were en route to Cuba.

Castro never has wavered in his ideological rampage against the United States, even as he has wooed Western investors. Recently he has been organizing a new “anti-Western alliance” of rogue states (including Hugo Chavez’s Venezuela). In 2001 Castro visited Libya six times. As recently as May 2001 Castro toured Syria, Libya and Iran to garner support for this effort. On May 10 in Tehran, Castro stated, “Iran and Cuba, in cooperation with each other, can bring America to its knees.”

The intelligence threat posed by Castro is real. He reportedly supplied intelligence on U.S. military activities to Saddam Hussein during the Persian Gulf War — information gained through Cuba’s Soviet-built, Russian-financed signals-intelligence facility in Lourdes capable of eavesdropping on phone calls in Washington and from spies in the United States. The Russians pay him more than $200 million a year in much-needed hard currency for access to his intelligence. We can only speculate how much bin Laden and Iraq may be paying.

The Chinese also have built an electronic-espionage complex in Bejucal, Cuba, operating under the cover of “Radio China.” The Federal Communications Commission has stated that the Chinese are capable of interfering with U.S. communications and air-traffic control. On May 13, the Chinese reportedly sent a message to New York air-traffic control falsely identifying themselves as a U.S. military transport plane — a chilling foretaste of things to come.

More worrisome is Castro’s potential chemical- and biological- weapons development and proliferation. He long has been suspected of hiding a chemical/biological-weapons program within his sophisticated, Soviet-created “biotechnology” industry.

In May 1998, secretary of defense William Cohen testified before Congress that Cuba possessed advanced biotechnology and was capable of mass-producing agents for biological warfare. High-level Cuban defectors, as well as Col. Ken Alibek, former deputy chief of the former Soviet Union’s biological-warfare program, support that assessment. Castro also may be exporting this capability to his rogue friends. In 2000, Cuban officials inaugurated a new “biotech- research” plant near Tehran.

Castro’s continued anti-American fervor, close intelligence links to rogue states and terrorists, and bio-warfare capability make him a dangerous neighbor.

What should the United States do? First we should clearly tell China and Russia that we no longer will allow Cuba to be used as an intelligence-collection or subversion site against the United States and demand they withdraw their advisers and technicians immediately. At minimum we also should demand that Castro shut down these facilities and allow for independent inspection and verification.

We also should demand to inspect all suspected chemical/biological- research (weapons) sites on the island.

Finally, we should redouble and refocus our intelligence efforts to verify and confirm the details of Cuban complicity with terrorist groups, and we should tell Castro in no uncertain terms that we will not tolerate Cuba being used as a haven for international terrorists. Castro is a player in this global terrorist network and should be treated as such.

Paul Crespo, a former Marine Corps combat-arms and intelligence officer, served as a naval attaché in the Balkans, Persian Gulf and Latin America. He is a counterterrorism consultant and a member of the Council on Emerging National Security Affairs in Washington.

Fair use, for educational purposes.

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001

.

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001

CHINESE PRESIDENT MEETS WITH ROCKEFELLER

Chinese President Jiang Zemin met with United States banker David Rockefeller Friday Afternoon in Beijing.

They exchanged views on Sino-US relations and other issues of common concern. Jiang said that since China and the US resumed exchanges in the 1970s, Rockefeller has visited China many times, and has always shown concern for and supported the development of Sino-US relations. He expressed appreciation for Rockefeller's contributions to the growth of Sino-US relations.

He said that both China and the US are large countries with important influence in the world. In addition, the two countries shoulder common responsibilities and have common interests on key issues concerning the world's peace and development.

The Chinese government always stands for developing constructive and cooperative relations with the US, and so the two governments and peoples should constantly increase mutual understanding, reinforce trust and cooperation, and make common efforts for the peace, stability and prosperity of the Asian- Pacific region and the world as a whole, he said.

He added that, while the world's economy faces new challenges, reinforced consultation and cooperation between China and US in the financial arena are of great importance for preventing regional financial turbulence and promoting regional economic development.

China will soon become a member of the World Trade Organization, which will benefit the country's economic development and will be conducive to its expansion of economic and trade cooperation with US and other countries, he said. He expressed the hope that China and US would make common efforts to promote mutual economic and trade cooperation to a new level.

Rockefeller said that US-China relation is one of the most important bilateral relations in the world. Although US-China relations have experienced misunderstanding in recent years, he said, he is glad to see the recent encouraging improvement in this respect.

He said that the US people are grateful to the Chinese government and people for their sympathy and support for the US people following the September 11 incident. He recommended that the US and China step up consultation and cooperation in the sphere of anti-terrorism. He also expressed congratulations to China on its imminent accession to the WTO and its hosting of the 2008 Olympic Games.

Rockefeller and his entourage are in China at the invitation of the Chinese People's Institute of Foreign Affairs. (People's Daily 09/29/2001)

http://www.smartgroups.com/message/viewdiscussion.cfm?gid=275218&messageid=8076

Sigh.. wonder what this was all about

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001

I wonder if the Chinese ever got to install any of that telephone equipment for which the Taliban contracted with them? If os, it ain't there any more!

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001

Og,

I sure hope not! They've done enough damage installing the fibreoptics over in Iraq...

-- Anonymous, October 14, 2001