nobs

8 Comments:

At 4:03 PM,  nobs said...

RAND CORPORATION REPORT
CHINESE MILITARY COMMERCE AND U.S.
NATIONAL SECURITY
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
JOHN KERRY'S PRIVATE TRADE TRIP TO BEIJING
CLICK HERE TO READ THE STORY ON INSIGHTMAG.COM

PLA DONG FENG 21 ADVANCED MISSILE

ALL DOCUMENTS OBTAINED BY FEDERAL COURT ACTION SMITH V. COMMERCE 398CV716
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
FROM THE RAND REPORT
According to one informed observer, a large percentage of the foreign earnings of defense-industrial companies are repatriated back to the factory or group of factories in China, in order to reinvest at the firm level, purchase new technology or alleviate some of the socials pressures currently drowing these factories in red ink, such as raising worker's wages and subsidzing other security burdens. The second major recipients are the traders themselves, who must pay for the foreign operations base and often reward themselves with large official and unofficial commissions from the transactions. The final group of recipients, the superior ministry and/or COSTIND, may extract a tax from the factories, although this money is generally assumed to be a relatively small percentage of the overall pie. In the case of the ministry level receipts, these funds are believed to be used for a wide variety of legitimate and illegitimate purposes, ranging from modernization of industrial plant to the padding of the Swiss bank accounts of top ministry officials. For COSTIND, the case is much the same, although the funds might also be used to fund defense conversion activities, technology purchases, or R&D. With all these "taxes," "commissions," and bureaucratic handouts along the way, it is very unlikely that any significant sums of money are transferred to the military side of the system.

Where do these profits go and what are they used for? Most analysts belive that military enterprises are permitted to keep a substantial proportion of their earnings. According to Tai Ming Cheung, the amount retained varies according to the type of military enterprises and the profitability of the operation, but they are generally able to retain 20-40 percent of their profits for reinvestment and other uses. The remaining moneies are divided between the General Logistics Department (40-60%), regional and provincial military authorities (10-20%) and the local PLA unit that owns the enterprise (10-20%). The profits passed to the local PLA unit, in turn, are divierted to two general areas. Some of the money is used for training, as well as to improve the living standards of the troops, including barracks construction and repair, food subsidies, and medical coverage. Other funds, however, are used for more corrupt purposes, such as paying for lavish meals, expensive foreign luxury automobiles, and Swiss bank accounts.

For those who oppose any subsidization of the PLA, there is thus ample evidence that profits from PLA-affiliated enterprises directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military, although the actual amount is not very substantial in the context of the overall budget.

American companies in China sometimes seek to transfer dual-use technology to their Chinese partners, some of who have military connections.

The Chinese have even enlisted former government officials to help them. Retired General Richard Secord, a member of the Reagan national security team, helped COSTIND's Yuanwang Corporation to create Technology Selection Inc. in Mountain View, California, which plans to acquire dual use technology and ship it to China.

The most well known example involves a McDonnell-Douglas joint venture relationship with China National Aero-Technology Import and Export Corporation (CATIC). In late 1996, a GAO investigation concluded that sophisticated machine tools, sold to the Chinese for use in the production of commercial aircraft parts, had been illegally transferred to AVIC's Nanchang Aircraft Factory, a defense-industrial factory which produces fightere aircraft and cruise missile for the PLA as well as a variety of civilian products. According to knowledgeable technical officials, this equipment, which had been used in a Columbus, Ohio plant to assemble Titan and MX missiles, would have significantly upgrade the capacity fo the Chinese aircraft or missile industry to produce high-tolerlance components.

The most notorious was the sale of broadband telecommunications technology to HuaMei Communications Ltd., a joint venture between SCM Brooks Telecommunications, a limited U.S. partnership, and Galaxy New Technology, a Chinese company whose primary shareholder was COSTIND.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

SELLING OUT TO THE CHINESE ARMY - INSIGHT MAGAZINE!
MAY 31 ISSUE!

DIA REPORT ON CHINESE DEFENSE INDUSTRY

MAOCARD - ACCEPTED AT ALL U.S. NUCLEAR WEAPONS LABS

 

At 4:06 PM,  nobs said...

http://www.insightmag.com/news/2004/07/19/National/Chinese.Kerry.Out.John.Kerrys.Private.Trade.Trip.To.Beijing-697573.shtml

 

At 4:09 PM,  nobs said...

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1191988/posts

 

At 10:11 AM,  Anonymous said...

Chinese army into big business
by Charles Smith

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Chinese Army is in business. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) draws great profits from business funding, commercial loans and outright sales in America. The profits eventually are used to support the PLA's main line of work -- that of killing people.

The Rand Corporation, a government sponsored think-tank, documented some of the profits drawn by the Chinese Army in a 1997 report on the red defense industry. The Clinton administration was forced to make the Rand report public by order of Federal Judge Robert Payne during a Freedom of Information lawsuit.

"For those who oppose any subsidization of the PLA, there is thus ample evidence that profits from PLA-affiliated enterprises directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military," concludes the Rand report.

According to the Rand Corporation, "American companies in China sometimes seek to transfer dual-use technology to their Chinese partners, some of whom have military connections.

"The Chinese have even enlisted former government officials to help them. Retired General Richard Secord, a member of the Reagan national security team, helped COSTIND's Yuanwang Corporation to create Technology Selection Inc. in Mountain View, California, which plans to acquire dual use technology and ship it to China.

"Where do these profits go and what are they used for?" asks the Rand Report.

"Most analysts believe that military enterprises are permitted to keep a substantial proportion of their earnings. According to Tai Ming Cheung, the amount retained varies according to the type of military enterprises and the profitability of the operation, but they are generally able to retain 20-40 percent of their profits for reinvestment and other uses.

"The remaining monies are divided between the General Logistics Department (40-60%), regional and provincial military authorities (10-20%) and the local PLA unit that owns the enterprise (10-20%). The profits passed to the local PLA unit, in turn, are diverted to two general areas. Some of the money is used for training, as well as to improve the living standards of the troops, including barracks construction and repair, food subsidies, and medical coverage. Other funds, however, are used for more corrupt purposes, such as paying for lavish meals, expensive foreign luxury automobiles, and Swiss bank accounts."

The Rand report is not the only view inside the Chinese economy. There is more information on the Chinese military and illegal activities compiled by the former U.S. Defense attaché to Beijing, Lt. Colonel Dennis Blasko. Blasko wrote a report, called "An Introduction to the Chinese Defense Industry" in which he details where the money goes.

"According to one informed observer," wrote Blasko in his 1994 paper on China, "a large percentage of the foreign earnings of defense-industrial companies are repatriated back to the factory or group of factories in China, in order to reinvest at the firm level, purchase new technology or alleviate some of the social pressures currently drowning these factories in red ink, such as raising workers' wages and subsidizing other security burdens.

"The second major recipients are the traders themselves," noted Colonel Blasko, "who must pay for the foreign operations base and often reward themselves with large official and unofficial commissions from the transactions.

"The final group of recipients, the superior ministry ... may extract a tax from the factories, although this money is generally assumed to be a relatively small percentage of the overall pie. In the case of the ministry level receipts, these funds are believed to be used for a wide variety of legitimate and illegitimate purposes, ranging from modernization of industrial plants to the padding of the Swiss bank accounts of top ministry officials.

"From a western perspective," noted Blasko, "what the Chinese call defense 'conversion' might better be called 'diversification,' as new product lines are developed in separate areas while military production capability is retained.

"Some of the monetary profits which accrue from defense conversion undoubtedly have found their way back into the overall funds available for defense spending, whether officially listed as part of the budget or not. These additional funds naturally have given the military leadership greater options in how they spend the monies available.

"It is certain that some profits from defense conversion could be used to buy prohibited technology," concluded Blasko.

The failure of American trade with China is that many of the so-called "joint" business ventures have fallen apart, or worse, turned into fronts for the Chinese Army operations against America. For example, the U.S. Commerce Department documented exactly how a Chrysler "joint venture" in China to produce minivans backfired.

The January 1999 U.S. Commerce Dept. report on technology transfers to China states, "despite almost a decade of relative success in producing both the Jeep Cherokee and a wholly locally produced military style jeep (the BJ2020 series), by 1995 Chrysler had pulled out of its bid to build a new minivan joint venture in Shanghai out of complete frustration.

"Chrysler executives were expressly concerned over licit and illicit technology transfers. Chinese officials were demanding more advanced technology than seemed appropriate or necessary to Chrysler," noted the Commerce report.

"Chrysler's concerns were amplified when Chrysler CEO Robert Eton was made aware that knock-offs of Chrysler's Jeep Cherokee had been seen on the streets of Beijing. When complaining about this to Chinese officials, he reportedly was told that this (the ability to copy Chrysler's Jeep Cherokee) was a good sign of progress in China's auto industry, about which he should be pleased. Apparently, he was not, and Chrysler soon canceled plans to go ahead with the Shanghai plant."

The debate about trade with China has split the U.S. commercial community and the Republican Party into two factions. Representative of the two factions, two Virginia Republicans squared off this week and the subject was permanent "Favored" trade with China. The two are seeking to replace retiring House Commerce Committee Chairman, Representative Thomas Bliley, R-Va.

"I do not support automatic renewal of most-favored nation status annually," stated State Senator Steve Martin. "Anyone who kicks his dog, beats his wife, and maintains constant threat to his neighbors should not expect to have normal relations with us."

Republican Delegate Eric Cantor disagrees. "I am for opening trade lines to make sure that we have access to trade with China. ... In fact, the more we trade with China the more likelihood there will be freedom and opportunity and consumer choice," said Cantor.

Cantor's argument, that continued trade with China brings "freedom and opportunity and consumer choice" is one shared by top national Republican leaders, including former President Bush. Chinese dissident Harry Wu does, however, not share Cantor's view.

"Freedom is not defined by having more choices of toothpaste," stated Harry Wu flatly during a personal interview.

Harry Wu spent a good portion of his adult life in a political concentration camp in China. Communist China maintains a system of so-called prison camps called "Lo Gai." Harry dug coal for 13 years under the People's Armed Police guards for speaking his mind, before the communists finally exiled him from his nation.

Harry Wu told me of his dangerous attempt to re-enter China in 1995, through the remote border with Kazakhstan. Once inside China, he was quickly identified by the Chinese Ministry of State Security, picked up and taken to a local station under arrest.

The remote border Security police station had no phone lines. However, the State Security officers were in real time contact with the main police computers in Beijing, using an American satellite uplink. The Chinese Security officers used American computers to search a centralized data bank in Beijing, pulling his complete dossier, photograph and fingerprints.

Harry Wu's capture and processing on U.S. made equipment is a simple illustration of how American trade with China can be perverted into a tool of oppression. The cost can take years to accumulate but it is paid eventually. Corporate executives should note that survivors of World War II death camps have won in court against international suppliers such as Ford and very large Swiss banks.

For those who oppose any subsidization of the Chinese Army, there is abundant evidence that profits from U.S. trade directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military. It's time to put the People's Liberation Army out of business.

Virginia State Senator Steve Martin is right. Anyone who kicks his dog, beats his wife, and maintains constant threat to his neighbors should not expect to have normal relations.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles Smith is a national security and defense reporter for WorldNetDaily.

 

At 10:12 AM,  Anonymous said...

Chinese army into big business
by Charles Smith

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


The Chinese Army is in business. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) draws great profits from business funding, commercial loans and outright sales in America. The profits eventually are used to support the PLA's main line of work -- that of killing people.

The Rand Corporation, a government sponsored think-tank, documented some of the profits drawn by the Chinese Army in a 1997 report on the red defense industry. The Clinton administration was forced to make the Rand report public by order of Federal Judge Robert Payne during a Freedom of Information lawsuit.

"For those who oppose any subsidization of the PLA, there is thus ample evidence that profits from PLA-affiliated enterprises directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military," concludes the Rand report.

According to the Rand Corporation, "American companies in China sometimes seek to transfer dual-use technology to their Chinese partners, some of whom have military connections.

"The Chinese have even enlisted former government officials to help them. Retired General Richard Secord, a member of the Reagan national security team, helped COSTIND's Yuanwang Corporation to create Technology Selection Inc. in Mountain View, California, which plans to acquire dual use technology and ship it to China.

"Where do these profits go and what are they used for?" asks the Rand Report.

"Most analysts believe that military enterprises are permitted to keep a substantial proportion of their earnings. According to Tai Ming Cheung, the amount retained varies according to the type of military enterprises and the profitability of the operation, but they are generally able to retain 20-40 percent of their profits for reinvestment and other uses.

"The remaining monies are divided between the General Logistics Department (40-60%), regional and provincial military authorities (10-20%) and the local PLA unit that owns the enterprise (10-20%). The profits passed to the local PLA unit, in turn, are diverted to two general areas. Some of the money is used for training, as well as to improve the living standards of the troops, including barracks construction and repair, food subsidies, and medical coverage. Other funds, however, are used for more corrupt purposes, such as paying for lavish meals, expensive foreign luxury automobiles, and Swiss bank accounts."

The Rand report is not the only view inside the Chinese economy. There is more information on the Chinese military and illegal activities compiled by the former U.S. Defense attaché to Beijing, Lt. Colonel Dennis Blasko. Blasko wrote a report, called "An Introduction to the Chinese Defense Industry" in which he details where the money goes.

"According to one informed observer," wrote Blasko in his 1994 paper on China, "a large percentage of the foreign earnings of defense-industrial companies are repatriated back to the factory or group of factories in China, in order to reinvest at the firm level, purchase new technology or alleviate some of the social pressures currently drowning these factories in red ink, such as raising workers' wages and subsidizing other security burdens.

"The second major recipients are the traders themselves," noted Colonel Blasko, "who must pay for the foreign operations base and often reward themselves with large official and unofficial commissions from the transactions.

"The final group of recipients, the superior ministry ... may extract a tax from the factories, although this money is generally assumed to be a relatively small percentage of the overall pie. In the case of the ministry level receipts, these funds are believed to be used for a wide variety of legitimate and illegitimate purposes, ranging from modernization of industrial plants to the padding of the Swiss bank accounts of top ministry officials.

"From a western perspective," noted Blasko, "what the Chinese call defense 'conversion' might better be called 'diversification,' as new product lines are developed in separate areas while military production capability is retained.

"Some of the monetary profits which accrue from defense conversion undoubtedly have found their way back into the overall funds available for defense spending, whether officially listed as part of the budget or not. These additional funds naturally have given the military leadership greater options in how they spend the monies available.

"It is certain that some profits from defense conversion could be used to buy prohibited technology," concluded Blasko.

The failure of American trade with China is that many of the so-called "joint" business ventures have fallen apart, or worse, turned into fronts for the Chinese Army operations against America. For example, the U.S. Commerce Department documented exactly how a Chrysler "joint venture" in China to produce minivans backfired.

The January 1999 U.S. Commerce Dept. report on technology transfers to China states, "despite almost a decade of relative success in producing both the Jeep Cherokee and a wholly locally produced military style jeep (the BJ2020 series), by 1995 Chrysler had pulled out of its bid to build a new minivan joint venture in Shanghai out of complete frustration.

"Chrysler executives were expressly concerned over licit and illicit technology transfers. Chinese officials were demanding more advanced technology than seemed appropriate or necessary to Chrysler," noted the Commerce report.

"Chrysler's concerns were amplified when Chrysler CEO Robert Eton was made aware that knock-offs of Chrysler's Jeep Cherokee had been seen on the streets of Beijing. When complaining about this to Chinese officials, he reportedly was told that this (the ability to copy Chrysler's Jeep Cherokee) was a good sign of progress in China's auto industry, about which he should be pleased. Apparently, he was not, and Chrysler soon canceled plans to go ahead with the Shanghai plant."

The debate about trade with China has split the U.S. commercial community and the Republican Party into two factions. Representative of the two factions, two Virginia Republicans squared off this week and the subject was permanent "Favored" trade with China. The two are seeking to replace retiring House Commerce Committee Chairman, Representative Thomas Bliley, R-Va.

"I do not support automatic renewal of most-favored nation status annually," stated State Senator Steve Martin. "Anyone who kicks his dog, beats his wife, and maintains constant threat to his neighbors should not expect to have normal relations with us."

Republican Delegate Eric Cantor disagrees. "I am for opening trade lines to make sure that we have access to trade with China. ... In fact, the more we trade with China the more likelihood there will be freedom and opportunity and consumer choice," said Cantor.

Cantor's argument, that continued trade with China brings "freedom and opportunity and consumer choice" is one shared by top national Republican leaders, including former President Bush. Chinese dissident Harry Wu does, however, not share Cantor's view.

"Freedom is not defined by having more choices of toothpaste," stated Harry Wu flatly during a personal interview.

Harry Wu spent a good portion of his adult life in a political concentration camp in China. Communist China maintains a system of so-called prison camps called "Lo Gai." Harry dug coal for 13 years under the People's Armed Police guards for speaking his mind, before the communists finally exiled him from his nation.

Harry Wu told me of his dangerous attempt to re-enter China in 1995, through the remote border with Kazakhstan. Once inside China, he was quickly identified by the Chinese Ministry of State Security, picked up and taken to a local station under arrest.

The remote border Security police station had no phone lines. However, the State Security officers were in real time contact with the main police computers in Beijing, using an American satellite uplink. The Chinese Security officers used American computers to search a centralized data bank in Beijing, pulling his complete dossier, photograph and fingerprints.

Harry Wu's capture and processing on U.S. made equipment is a simple illustration of how American trade with China can be perverted into a tool of oppression. The cost can take years to accumulate but it is paid eventually. Corporate executives should note that survivors of World War II death camps have won in court against international suppliers such as Ford and very large Swiss banks.

For those who oppose any subsidization of the Chinese Army, there is abundant evidence that profits from U.S. trade directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military. It's time to put the People's Liberation Army out of business.

Virginia State Senator Steve Martin is right. Anyone who kicks his dog, beats his wife, and maintains constant threat to his neighbors should not expect to have normal relations.




--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Charles Smith is a national security and defense reporter for WorldNetDaily.

 

At 10:17 AM,  Anonymous said...

Chinese army into big business
by Charles Smith


The Chinese Army is in business. The People's Liberation Army (PLA) draws great profits from business funding, commercial loans and outright sales in America. The profits eventually are used to support the PLA's main line of work -- that of killing people.
The Rand Corporation, a government sponsored think-tank, documented some of the profits drawn by the Chinese Army in a 1997 report on the red defense industry. The Clinton administration was forced to make the Rand report public by order of Federal Judge Robert Payne during a Freedom of Information lawsuit.
"For those who oppose any subsidization of the PLA, there is thus ample evidence that profits from PLA-affiliated enterprises directly benefit the main-line forces of the Chinese military," concludes the Rand report.
According to the Rand Corporation, "American companies in China sometimes seek to transfer dual-use technology to their Chinese partners, some of whom have military connections.
"The Chinese have even enlisted former government officials to help them. Retired General Richard Secord, a member of the Reagan national security team, helped COSTIND's Yuanwang Corporation to create Technology Selection Inc. in Mountain View, California, which plans to acquire dual use technology and ship it to China.
"Where do these profits go and what are they used for?" asks the Rand Report.
"Most analysts believe that military enterprises are permitted to keep a substantial proportion of their earnings. According to Tai Ming Cheung, the amount retained varies according to the type of military enterprises and the profitability of the operation, but they are generally able to retain 20-40 percent of their profits for reinvestment and other uses.
"The remaining monies are divided between the General Logistics Department (40-60%), regional and provincial military authorities (10-20%) and the local PLA unit that owns the enterprise (10-20%). The profits passed to the local PLA unit, in turn, are diverted to two general areas. Some of the money is used for training, as well as to improve the living standards of the troops, including barracks construction and repair, food subsidies, and medical coverage. Other funds, however, are used for more corrupt purposes, such as paying for lavish meals, expensive foreign luxury automobiles, and Swiss bank accounts."
The Rand report is not the only view inside the Chinese economy. There is more information on the Chinese military and illegal activities compiled by the former U.S. Defense attaché to Beijing, Lt. Colonel Dennis Blasko. Blasko wrote a report, called "An Introduction to the Chinese Defense Industry" in which he details where the money goes.

 

At 11:21 AM,  mjfreeze said...

Great News! Anyone thinking about going into business for themselves, or wanting to expand an existing business should check out the world's largest source of small business grants and government business loans.

 

At 4:16 AM,  Anonymous said...

ativan pharmacy lorazepam 1mg que es - ativan vs versed

 

Post a Comment

<< Home |