Quantcast

Report: Kerry Took Cash From Chinese Military Intelligence

N8 v2.0

Not the sharpest tool in the shed
Oct 18, 2002
11,003
149
The Cleft of Venus
Kerry Took Cash From Chinese Military Intelligence
NewsMax | Monday, Feb. 2, 2004 | Carl Limbacher

Democrats are counting on Sen. John Kerry's military credentials to convince voters that he can be trusted with America's national security.

But documents that surfaced over the weekend raise serious questions about whether Kerry was duped in the 1990s into helping the Chinese military perfect its ability to strike the U.S. with nuclear weapons.

In 1996 Kerry met with Liu Chaoying, the daughter of a powerful Chinese military official who also doubled as vice president of a subsidiary of the state-owned China Aerospace Corp.

Before the meeting, held in Kerry's Senate office, Liu's sponsor, Johnny Chung, made clear she was interested in getting her company listed on the U.S. Stock Exchange.

The Democratic presidential front-runner was only too happy to oblige and ordered his aides to contact the Securities and Exchange Commission.

"The next day," reports Newsweek, "Liu and Chung were ushered into a private briefing with a senior SEC official."

Within weeks, Chung returned the favor, staging a Kerry fund raiser at a Beverly Hills hotel that raked in $10,000 for the senator's re-election campaign.

Bank records would later show that Kerry's Chinese campaign cash came from $300,000 in overseas wire transfers sent to Chung on orders from the chief of Chinese military intelligence, Newsweek reports.

The money was routed through a Hong Kong bank account controlled by Liu, whose company later benefited from waivers granted by the Clinton administration to the U.S. aerospace giant Loral Corp.

As Liu and Chung were lining the pockets of the Democratic Party's political elite, Loral handed over top-secret missile guidance technology to Liu's firm.

Liu's China Aerospace used the information to perfect Beijing's fleet of intercontinental ballistic missiles, which before the 1990s could not strike the U.S.

By the end of the decade, however, China's ICBMs could reach the entire continental United States with pinpoint accuracy, thanks in part to the senator who says now he can be trusted with America's national security.

Chung later testified that before Liu wired him the cash to contribute to prominent Democrats, the chief of Chinese intelligence personally told him: "We like your president. We want to see him re-elected."

Apparently, Beijing felt the same way about Sen. John Kerry.
 

RhinofromWA

Brevity R Us
Aug 16, 2001
4,622
0
Lynnwood, WA
Originally posted by DRB
Unbiased source I'm sure.

www.newsmax.com doesn't have any axes to grind do they?
Are the facts true? :confused: Where would you expect such a report to surface or even show up? :think:

oh and the red X (must work now since I hard pasted the addy for the pic) above is to that tired old Saddam hand shake from the 80's...I think.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
6
Originally posted by DRB
Unbiased source I'm sure.

www.newsmax.com doesn't have any axes to grind do they?
it's been on reuters since sunday, and to be in newsweek later in the week.

recall the title of the reuter's story reads "Newsweek Revives 1996 Kerry-Chung Issue" , so this has been around for a while.

just a chicken comin' home to roost is all.
 

ohio

The Fresno Kid
Nov 26, 2001
6,649
26
SF, CA
It's unclear from the article if Kerry had any reason to think, or ability to foresee, Loral corporation would open their vaults to China Aerospace... seems like two unrelated issues.

There's nothing wrong with helping a corporation get listed. If the company later engaged in illegalities, it might be naivete, but it's hardly as incriminating as, say, Bush/Cheney's dealings with Enron.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by $tinkle
it's been on reuters since sunday, and to be in newsweek later in the week.

recall the title of the reuter's story reads "Newsweek Revives 1996 Kerry-Chung Issue" , so this has been around for a while.

just a chicken comin' home to roost is all.
So you can honestly say that those two articles (reuters and Newsmax) are saying the samething? Or even proporting the same set of "facts"?

Additionally in the Newsweek article you mention the following quote is included.

"There was never any suggestion that Kerry knew about the dubious origins of Chung's largess," Newsweek wrote.


Again I say it dripping with as much sarcasm as I can possibly muster (and its a lot), I'm sure Newsmax doesn't have any axes to grind.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
I absolutely hate that photo Rumsfeld and Saddam. It is just plain stupid in any context other than an arguement indicating that foreign policy allies and enemies are constantly shifting in a complicated world.

Folks think the politicians and policy makers that they have issue with have to be accurate fortune tellers and/or omnipotent. It is compounded by the fact that most cannot apply the same critical eye to the politicians and policy makers that they support.

(not shooting at Opie, just used his post as a quote for the picture)
 
Originally posted by DRB
I absolutely hate that photo Rumsfeld and Saddam. It is just plain stupid in any context other than an arguement indicating that foreign policy allies and enemies are constantly shifting in a complicated world.

Folks think the politicians and policy makers that they have issue with have to be accurate fortune tellers and/or omnipotent. It is compounded by the fact that most cannot apply the same critical eye to the politicians and policy makers that they support.

(not shooting at Opie, just used his post as a quote for the picture)
I'm sorry, but the photo of Saddam and Rummy is more telling than any meeting Kerry had with a Chinese national regarding a stock exchange listing. We knew right out of the gate, Saddam was a crazed loser. We backed him anyway. We saw him as the lesser of 2 evils, and once again, we were wrong.

Accuracy in the future was a sure thing with Sadam. They should have known better. And what is probably worse, is they most likely did know better.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by CRUM
I'm sorry, but the photo of Saddam and Rummy is more telling than any meeting Kerry had with a Chinese national regarding a stock exchange listing. We knew right out of the gate, Saddam was a crazed loser. We backed him anyway. We saw him as the lesser of 2 evils, and once again, we were wrong.

Accuracy in the future was a sure thing with Sadam. They should have known better. And what is probably worse, is they most likely did know better.
Monday morning quarterbacking at its best.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Originally posted by DRB
It is just plain stupid in any context other than an arguement indicating that foreign policy allies and enemies are constantly shifting in a complicated world.
That was *exactly* my point with Kerry. Can you hear the annoyance in my post? Do you see me :rolleyes: at the silliness of that Kerry article?

And in fact, one could say, as Crum did, that it was probably more obvious at the time to Rums that Saddam would go rogue than to Kerry that there'd be a problem. And the seriously weak link between Kerry and Chinese ICBMs is rediculous.

You'd sooner be having lunch with Kevin Bacon than linking Kerry to ICBMs.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by LordOpie
That was *exactly* my point with Kerry. Can you hear the annoyance in my post? Do you see me :rolleyes: at the silliness of that Kerry article?

And in fact, one could say, as Crum did, that it was probably more obvious at the time to Rums that Saddam would go rogue than to Kerry that there'd be a problem. And the seriously weak link between Kerry and Chinese ICBMs is rediculous.

You'd sooner be having lunch with Kevin Bacon than linking Kerry to ICBMs.
Did you notice the following at the bottom of my post?

(not shooting at Opie, just used his post as a quote for the picture)
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Originally posted by DRB
Did you notice the following at the bottom of my post?

(not shooting at Opie, just used his post as a quote for the picture)
yup, wasn't taking it personally, just using it as a launching board to explicitly point at the stooopidity of partisan-whores since I don't think my "picture-worth-a-1000-words" was clear enough :D

I still agree more with Crum than you tho regarding Saddam. Heck, one year after he took office, he INVADES Iran. Sorry, ya just had to know Saddam wasn't going to be taking orders from the US for very long and would soon bite the hand that fed him... if it was true that he was a puppet.

(not shooting at DRB since I think very highly of his commentaries)

EDIT: Sorry if I'm a bit grumpy... it's 5am and I'm not supposed to be up for a couple more hours. My day is gonna be fux0red.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by LordOpie
I still agree more with Crum than you tho regarding Saddam. Heck, one year after he took office, he INVADES Iran. Sorry, ya just had to know Saddam wasn't going to be taking orders from the US for very long and would soon bite the hand that fed him... if it was true that he was a puppet.
I doubt seriously that anyone was fooled into thinking that we were dealing with a boy scout that would always have our back. Ever wonder how come Saddam didn't have a military with US hardware in it as opposed to the French and Soviet crap he had?

Sometimes foreign policy decisions are ugly. Sometimes a preceived greater good is being served by these types of alliances with the devil. Decisions are made that long term everyone knows are going to be a problem but short term is expedient in dealing with another. Again foreign policy is an ever shifting landscape of ally and enemy.

Speaking of a puppet..... much of the decision for Saddam marching into Iran when he did had a bunch to do with Iran's Northern neighbor.
 
Originally posted by DRB
I doubt seriously that anyone was fooled into thinking that we were dealing with a boy scout that would always have our back. Ever wonder how come Saddam didn't have a military with US hardware in it as opposed to the French and Soviet crap he had?

Sometimes foreign policy decisions are ugly. Sometimes a preceived greater good is being served by these types of alliances with the devil. Decisions are made that long term everyone knows are going to be a problem but short term is expedient in dealing with another. Again foreign policy is an ever shifting landscape of ally and enemy.

Speaking of a puppet..... much of the decision for Saddam marching into Iran when he did had a bunch to do with Iran's Northern neighbor.
You are probably right, as I pointed out that we saw Saddam as the lesser of 2 evils. And I agree that we look to short term solutions that will put out the immediate fires. And that is the problem. Short term solutions are nothing but temporary bandaids. And we keep doing it. Never thinking beyond the end of the gas pump when it comes to Mid-east solutions.
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by CRUM
You are probably right, as I pointed out that we saw Saddam as the lesser of 2 evils. And I agree that we look to short term solutions that will put out the immediate fires. And that is the problem. Short term solutions are nothing but temporary bandaids. And we keep doing it. Never thinking beyond the end of the gas pump when it comes to Mid-east solutions.
It might be problem but a necessary reality in many cases. Immediate fires can't be ignored even at the expense of creating problems long term. Think USSR during World War II. And this is not only a problem of US foreign policy nor is it only related to the gas pump. This has been the problem with the foreign policy of all nations throughout history. The solution to the problem? Get that machine in Paycheck working.
 

$tinkle

Expert on blowing
Feb 12, 2003
14,591
6
Originally posted by DRB
So you can honestly say that those two articles (reuters and Newsmax) are saying the samething? Or even proporting the same set of "facts"?
the reuters story starts off with:
John Kerry met a key figure in the 1996 fund-raising scandals well before the Massachusetts senator had previously acknowledged, Newsweek reported
and after that the quote you pointed out shows up
"There was never any suggestion that Kerry knew about the dubious origins of Chung's largess," Newsweek wrote
the 1st quote is fact, the 2nd a non-story, and thusly bias. Point is, we already know who the source is from the byline, so why tell us again that Newsweek was the one to suggest that Kerry be exonerated, unless Reuters wanted to obviously divorce themselves from Newsweek's bias to dissuade what so many see as an attempt to deceive by Senator Kerry. That's my take. I've been keeping a careful eye on Reuters over the past 2 years, & they've improved their reporting WRT bias. Either that or i'm growing thicker-skinned.

Originally posted by DRB
Again I say it dripping with as much sarcasm as I can possibly muster (and its a lot), I'm sure Newsmax doesn't have any axes to grind.:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
only a fool would dare say they don't have a right leaning agenda - to the point of superincumbency
 

DRB

unemployed bum
Oct 24, 2002
15,242
0
Watchin' you. Writing it all down.
Originally posted by $tinkle
the reuters story starts off with: and after that the quote you pointed out shows up the 1st quote is fact, the 2nd a non-story, and thusly bias. Point is, we already know who the source is from the byline, so why tell us again that Newsweek was the one to suggest that Kerry be exonerated, unless Reuters wanted to obviously divorce themselves from Newsweek's bias to dissuade what so many see as an attempt to deceive by

Reuters used the word Newsweek 6 times and the magazine 3 times. It was an article about a Newsweek article.

They were the ones that told you there was a problem then they were the ones that told you nothing suggested that Kerry knew the source of the funds or the background.

Its called citing your source.
 

LordOpie

MOTHER HEN
Oct 17, 2002
21,022
3
Denver
Neil Bush business links in spotlight

Revelations that President George Bush's younger brother has a sinecure worth $US400,000 ($550,000) a year with a Chinese firm partly owned by the son of the senior leader Jiang Zemin have thrown a new sleaze factor into US-China relations.

The business link was exposed in court papers leaked from Neil Bush's messy divorce proceedings in Houston, Texas, and could add to pressure on President Bush to show toughness towards rapidly rising Chinese imports ahead of the presidential and congressional elections next November.

In the past week the Bush Administration has slapped a succession of restrictions and extra duties on Chinese imports ranging from bras to colour TV sets to placate domestic lobbies - even if, as in the case of bras, there are no longer any factories in the US making the product.

A leaked court transcript published in US newspapers on Tuesday includes details of Neil Bush's consultancy contract signed in August last year with a computer chip firm, Grace Semiconductor Manufacturing of Shanghai, whose main investors include Jiang Mianheng, son of Jiang Zemin, the former Chinese president, who held a summit with President Bush in Texas in October last year and who remains chairman of China's powerful Central Military Commission.

The consultancy was proposed by Winston Wong, a founder of Grace Semiconductor who is the son of Wang Yung-ching, founder of Taiwan's biggest business group, Formosa Plastics. Mr Wong had been an investor since 2000 in an Austin, Texas, company started by Neil Bush to provide internet learning programs.

Under the contract, Neil Bush, 48, is to receive $US2 million worth of Grace Semiconductor preferred stock paid in annual instalments of $US400,000 over five years, in return for providing the company "from time to time with business strategies and policies; latest information and trends of the related industry, and other expertised advices".

In a deposition filed with the Houston court in March, a lawyer asked Neil Bush: "You have absolutely no educational background in semiconductors, do you?" "That's correct," Mr Bush said.

In 1990 Neil Bush was fined $US50,000 and barred from banking activities for mismanagement of a Denver savings and loan bank. This month the President of Taiwan, Chen Shui-bian, was accused by his opposition of paying $US1 million for a meeting with Neil Bush in New York. Mr Chen denied any payment.
link