Heads Up
A Weekly edition of News from around our country
March 21, 1997 #27
by: Doug Fiedor fiedor19@eos.net
----------------------------------------------------------
Previous Editions at: http://mmc.cns.net/headsup.html
----------------------------------------------------------
BOYCOTT CHINA
Thursday, Lance R. Crowe, Chairman of
the American Constitutional Campaign Committee told
"Heads Up" that the ACCC will soon call for a national
boycott of all goods made in Communist China.
"The Chinese government is spying on
American business, making deals with members of organized
crime, attempting to smuggle large caches of guns into
the country, and even corrupting political campaigns with
illegal campaign contributions," Crowe said. "They
recently brought enough military guns into this country
to supply a small army. It was only by accident that
they were caught."
Recent news reports state that Poly
Technologies, a Chinese Communist Weapons Company
controlled by the Chinese government, attempted to
smuggle 2,000 automatic weapons into the United States.
They were caught when the "organized crime" members they
thought they were selling to turned out to be federal
officers.
In another instance, the Chinese attempted
to smuggle approximately 100,000 military-style weapons
and millions of rounds of ammunition into the U.S. The
shipment was discovered in a California warehouse by
federal agents.
"Since these types of weapons cannot be
legally sold on the open market, what was the intended
purpose for these weapons?" Crowe asks. He also noted
that these are the only two shipments that were
discovered. "How many were not caught?"
Crowe stated that the purpose of ACCC is
to support the United States Constitution, "with all of
the liberties and freedoms intended by the Founding
Fathers." Therefore, he strongly questions the tacit
approval of the oppressive Communist Chinese government
by Washington.
"The Chinese are a Communist Power that
rivals that of the former Soviet Union. Why is it that
American officials are approving of the continued
interaction with a global superpower whose stated goals
include the destruction of personal freedoms?"
Crowe also said that "most" Americans will
support a boycott on Communist Chinese products once they
understand China's intentions. "Furthermore," he noted,
"most Chinese products are the result of slave labor, so
why should freedom loving Americans not support the
boycott of these Products."
A coalition of American conservatives in
Washington, while not calling for an actual boycott of
Chinese products, did launch an effort on Tuesday to deny
Beijing normal trading privileges. This action could
cause stiff tariffs to be imposed on Communist Chinese
goods imported into the United States.
Terence Jeffrey, editor of the conservative
national weekly Human Events, said "This Republican
Congress should not extend Most Favored Nation (MFN)
status to China for yet another year. Instead, it should
focus on the unavoidable business of investigating
whether President Clinton kowtowed for cash before
Chinese Communists and compromised the security of our
country."
Conservative columnist Pat Buchanan also
jumped into the fray helping to lead the charge against
China's MFN status. "Clearly the persecution of
Christians and abuse of pregnant women and Tibetans have
given us the high moral ground, and what the campaign
finance scandals have given us is the high political
ground," Buchanan said.
Reuters reports that joining Buchanan and
Jeffrey to launch the anti-MFN effort were Gary Bauer,
president of the Family Research Council, a conservative
religious group; Fred Barnes, a columnist with the
conservative Weekly Standard magazine and Representative
Jerry Solomon, a New York Republican who heads the House
of Representatives Rules Committee.
"ACCC agrees," said Lance Crowe. "China
should not be approved for Most Favored Nation status
until they clean up their act. Recent accounts show that
whatever it is that Communist China is up to, one thing
is certain: Their intentions are not in the best
interest of the people of the United States."
The recently formed American Constitutional
Campaign Committee is a national organization dedicated
to the resurgence of a Constitutional form of government,
as intended by the nation's Founding Fathers. The
organization can be contacted by e-mail at:
ACCC@mindspring.com or by snail-mail at: American
Constitutional Campaign Committee 5300 Scottsville
Road, P.O. Box 51851, Bowling Green, KY 42102-6851.
MORE REASONS FOR A BOYCOTT
This week the People's Daily, the
government controlled propaganda sheet of the Chinese
Communist Party, accused the U.S. Congress of arrogant
meddling in Hong Kong. The newspaper said American
legislators were using concerns about the territory's
post-colonial future to try to contain China.
The response came because the U.S. House
of Representatives approved a bill calling on Beijing to
honor its promises to Hong Kong after the British colony
returns to Chinese rule on July 1. The Chinese
Communists called the bill pointless, unjustified and
wrong.
The newspaper said that China's decision
to replace Hong Kong's democratically elected legislature
after the transfer (and suspend many of the human rights
guarantees) was necessary for a smooth transition.
Furthermore, it condemned China's critics in the U.S.
Congress, describing them as "supercilious" and
"prejudiced" as well as ignorant and arrogant.
The newspaper went on to say that, "This
once again reveals the ugly mentality of some members of
the U.S. Congress who want to lord it over the world.
What article of International Law gives the United States
such authority? No sovereign government could tolerate
the practice of the supercilious U.S. Congress in grossly
interfering in its internal affairs."
Later they called American media reports
accusing Beijing of making illegal campaign donations to
Democrats "lies by anti-China forces."
"Acting like someone who chases the wind
and clutches at shadows, some American media took the
chance to create sensational news without any fact in a
vilification campaign against China," the Communist Party
mouthpiece reported. They went on to say that, "Some
members of the U.S. Congress have also made use of the
matter in an attempt to cook up charges against China."
However, FBI investigators said Beijing's
diplomatic community and espionage network helped
Democratic fund-raiser John Huang and other political
operatives get millions of dollars in campaign donations
and "walking-around" cash for last year's election.
Some of the money was laundered through
the investment arm of Beijing's Trade Ministry, China
Resources Holdings Co., which is part-owner of Lippo's
land and property subsidiaries in Asia. And there is, in
fact, a federal grand jury in Washington looking into
that at this time.
In another commentary this week, the
newspaper accused the rival Nationalist government of
Taiwan of buying influence in Washington and then casting
the blame on China.
In a rather interesting related development,
Russia and China have pledged to create a strong new
partnership aimed at countering the influence of the
United States. The two governments have declared their
intentions to create closer military and economic ties.
Russia and China are determined to create an "equal
partnership ... aimed at strategic interaction in the
21st century" and "building a multi-polar world," news
reports said.
Moscow is seeking new markets for its
arms and technical expertise, and China, with its booming
economy, has become a willing customer.
NOTE: The above information was compiled
from a dozen or more credible news sources from around
the world. The information is offered here to help give
"Heads Up" readers some insight into exactly what those
in the Communist Chinese government really think of us,
our way of life and our government. Their attitude is
alarming, to say the least!
For these reasons, and all of the reasons
Lance Crowe of ACCC stated above, "Heads Up"
wholeheartedly agrees. We the People of the United
States must act. And the only action we can legally take
at this time is to boycott all products coming from
Communist China. We are their major trading partner. So
let's hit them where it hurts, in their pocketbook.
SUPREME COURT UPDATE
In the Nov. 22 issue of "Heads Up" we
described a case of unbridled administrative power gone
totally wacko. Well folks, it turns out that the United
States Supreme Court agreed -- unanimously.
Here's a quick rundown on the particulars:
During the 1992 drought, the federal
government cut off irrigation water to farms and ranches
around Oregon's Lost River. Because of this, farmers
watched their hay, grain and sugarbeets die in the
fields. The damage was estimated at about $75-million.
This action also caused many ranchers to
sell off cattle, because there was no feed for them.
Many area farmers and ranchers went bankrupt.
The EPA discontinued the water supply
because they thought it more important to save an
"endangered" sucker fish. Federal bureaucrats decided
that fish are more important than the livelihood of
humans.
The farmers and ranchers tried to sue the
government. The district court said only
"environmentalists" have standing, not citizens. So, the
farmers appealed. The liberal 9th U.S. Circuit Court of
Appeals in San Francisco also ruled that only
environmentalists, and others who want to "increase"
protection for wildlife, can sue under the Endangered
Species Act. Those wanting to reduce it, or to protest
an EPA action, cannot. So, the case ended up in the
Supreme Court.
This week, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
on the case. Effectively, in a nine to zip opinion, the
Supreme Court told the District Court and the 9th.
Circuit Court of Appeals to buzz-off with that liberal
environmental mumbo-jumbo. The law says "any person"
may sue, and it damn well means that "any person" may
sue. Even farmers.
In the unanimous decision, the Court said
people who contend they have suffered economic harm from
the act's enforcement may invoke the very same law in
accusing the federal government of doing too much to
protect some species.
The Clinton Administration wanted a "one
way" decision. That is, they did not want citizens to
have any recourse against their administrative decisions
whatsoever. The Court, however, had other ideas: "there
is no textual basis for saying that the formulation's
expansion of standing requirements applies to
environmentalists alone," the opinion states. Therefore,
folks, we may now sue the regulators for anything and
everything they do!
We only wish that the farmers had
challenged authority for the whole of that law while they
were in court. None of these administrative agencies are
Constitutional. So, we can't help but think that, were
this ever to be presented properly to the Supreme Court,
a few thousand regulators may end up standing in the
unemployment line.
Maybe someday. . . .
COLOR IT ILLEGAL
Some in the liberal media are still trying
to make slippery excuses for Slick Willie. The problem
is, Washington cannot keep a secret. The Clinton,
Clinton & Gore team have been caught with their arm up
to their elbow in the Communist Chinese money jar!
Oh sure, Slick's still walking
(err . . . hobbling) around doing his Bart Simpson
impression -- "Didn't do it. Didn't see me do it. Can't
prove anything." -- for anyone who will listen. The
believers, however, are getting fewer and fewer by the
day. Most of his preferred media minions have even
deserted him. So too have many of his staunchest
supporters in Congress.
You see folks, this China thing is not a
new story. The Clinton administration getting involved
in it is a new twist, to be sure. But the China
espionage story is an old one around Washington. More
recent is China's willingness to pay big bucks for
influence, but even that has been common knowledge in
Washington for quite a few years.
For instance, former CIA officer and U.S.
ambassador to China in the Bush administration,
James F. Lilley, confirmed the Chinese economic espionage
connection to Democratic fund-raising in the 1992
campaigns. Lilley reported that the FBI discovered
Chinese efforts to interfere in American campaigns as
early as 1991. And it was back then that FBI agents
first warned a number of Democratic members of Congress
to watch for Chinese donations passed through
intermediaries. Lilley, as we said, was ambassador in
Beijing then, and so in a very good position to be "in
the know."
To think that Clinton & Co. didn't know
any of this would take a huge stretch of the imagination,
because everyone in the Bush Administration did. So too
did (at least) Senators Dianne Feinstein, Barbara Boxer
and Daniel Patrick Moynihan, and Rep. Nancy Pelosi.
You would also have to add the FBI and the Department of
Justice (they told everyone), the CIA and NSA (they
intercepted the messages), the National Security Council
(which receives all such reports for the White House),
and of course the Secret Service.
Big secret, wasn't it!
But the story gets even more interesting.
Anyone remember who was chairman of the Democratic
National Committee when all this started? Yup, Ron
Brown. He was told, too. As was Senator Chris Dodd, who
came in as DNC chairman later, when Brown went to
Commerce. That's why all information points to Brown and
Dodd purposely targeting the Communist Chinese
contributors.
The fact is that half of Congress knew all
about the Chinese Communist money coming to influence our
government. But only the socialists, such as Feinstein,
Boxer, Dashell, and of course House Minority Leader Dick
Gephardt, had their hands outstretched actively grabbing
for it.
But Slick's election campaign grabbed the
most. Slick, and his (illegal) alternate campaign fund
over at the DNC, that is. The Commie operatives even
tried to contribute $600,000 to Slick's legal defense
fund.
Funny thing about that. The managers
running Slick's legal defense fund immediately gave the
money back. They knew it was all illegal contributions.
Yet, Slick's reelection campaign, and the DNC, took all
the money they could get from the very same people!
The socialists in Congress kept it too -- till the news
broke last week, that is.
Selling influence is the natural way of
doing business in Washington. They call it fund-
raising. That is, after all, all they have available to
sell to get campaign funds. Influence. Laws, rules and
regulations are changed regularly for major campaign
contributors. It's all technically illegal, of course.
But, these are elected officials, after all. . . .
Even so, there are some limits. Not many.
But some.
When a campaign committee knowingly and
intentionally accepts funds, however well laundered, from
a foreign government, that is illegal (see last week's
"Heads Up" for more on this). If prosecuted, they can go
to prison for that.
But that's not the point here. The
question is, would it also be beyond the acceptable limit
for Washington politicians? That is, would accepting
laundered campaign contributions from a foreign
government be seen as something so offensive that their
companions in government will turn them in?
No! Of course not. It is an accepted
practice. So accepted, in fact, that even the few who do
not do it personally will not talk about the others who
do.
However, it is still illegal. And, if even
a hint of that becomes exposed during the Thompson Senate
hearings, many in Washington are in really deep trouble.
So, don't look for anyone in the Congressional
investigations to bring that point up unless they have a
(political) death wish. Else, there will suddenly be a
lot of special elections this year.
Oh . . . and that's why many of them want
a special prosecutor so badly. With Congressional
hearings, all of their dirty laundry will be out in the
open for all to see. With a special prosecutor, the
whole investigation will be done in secret.
It will be very interesting to see how the
professional politicians handle the hearings. Can they
limit the hearings exclusively to the administration?
Surely, back room deals have already been made to do just
that. Nevertheless, someone could inadvertently blurt
out information about illegal Congressional fund-raising.
So, look for CSPAN to go dark and the
hearings to end immediately if either of two important
key words -- Israel or Taiwan -- are mentioned. . . .
But never fear. There is plenty of other
good stuff available to stick the administration with.
For instance, there is a special word
sometimes used in politics that comes to mind: What do
you call a government official who intentionally places
an operative for a foreign country in a government
position? OK then; what if it is a position that offers
the foreign operative access to secret information that
the foreign government really wants?
Now, we're just "supposing" here, you
understand. . . . But, what if this elected public
official placed one or more of these foreign
operatives in positions where they had access to a whole
lot of secret information every day? And, how about
if at least one of the operatives was also in a policy
making position in which he could "make deals" with the
foreign government for our government?
We can't quite seem to place the correct
political term for that type of action right now. But if
you think of it, you have three Members of Congress who
need to hear from you.
HATCH IS NO HAWK
Senator Orrin G. Hatch, the Utah
Republican, sometimes tries to present himself publicly
as a hawk. He's not.
Recently, Hatch joined forces with Senator
Edward M. Kennedy, the Massachusetts Social-Democrat, in
proposing a tax increase to pay for another of Kennedy's
harebrained socialist schemes. They agreed to propose a
43-cent per pack increase in federal cigarette taxes as a
way to fund Kennedy's "Kidcare" bill.
Kennedy, of course, has been proposing
these hackneyed socialist schemes for almost as long as
he has been in Congress. "Legislation seeking to provide
health insurance for the nation's uninsured children."
Yeah, that sure seems like a worthy cause. . . .
Except, wait a minute here . . . don't they
already have that? Welfare, it's called. Welfare comes
with free womb to tomb medical treatment. Social
Security and SSI do too.
And, when did medical care ever get to be a
function of the central government, anyway? Our copy of
the United States Constitution came directly from a
United States Senator's office. Therefore, we consider
it to be a true copy. Yet, no place in the text is
authorization given to the federal government to even
speak on the subject of health care!
Therefore, they should not.
ANOTHER STUPID LAW
Congress seems to be moving right along
with their unconstitutional bills this year. This time
it's "The Working Families Flexibility Act." The bill
passed the House this week.
But before we lambaste that, there is a
bill we all should be supporting. Texas Rep. Ron Paul
writes about it in his latest issue of "Freedom Watch":
"A piece of legislation I am going to be
supporting . . . is called the 'Enumerated Powers Act,'
which will require that every bill brought before the
Congress must contain the exact section of the
Constitution which allows for that measure's existence.
If a bill fails to include that citation, the bill will
not be considered. The importance is this: If we
followed the Constitution in the legislation presented,
taxes would be only a fraction of their current level.
By requiring that every bill brought before the Congress
specifically cite the Constitution, it will at least
force Members of Congress to consider exactly what it is
they are doing. Right now, very few ever think about
what gives them the power to regulate, spend and tax."
Right on! This bill was presented in the
last session, but somehow slipped through the cracks when
the budget fight started. Meanwhile, we get "feel good"
bills like "The Working Families Flexibility Act," on
subjects which are not the business of government.
It is not important how good of an idea a
bill may or may not be. If there is no Constitutional
authority, Congress should not even spend time speaking
on the subject.
Tell them so.
-- End --