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 --