Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Deal Gives China Access to Top Secret CIA, FBI Communications
NewsMax.com ^ | 2/25/03 | Carl Limbacher and NewsMax.com Staff

Posted on 02/25/2003 9:20:33 PM PST by kattracks

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last
To: Poohbah
Are you?

Yes I am a U.S. citizen and I was born in the U.S. I believe U.S. policies should further the interests of freedom and prosperity for American citizens.

61 posted on 02/26/2003 7:38:00 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 60 | View Replies]

To: honway
Yes I am a U.S. citizen and I was born in the U.S. I believe U.S. policies should further the interests of freedom and prosperity for American citizens.

Could've fooled me. You demand that Americans be forced at gunpoint to hire you just because you're an American.

62 posted on 02/26/2003 7:40:51 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 61 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
You demand that Americans be forced at gunpoint to hire you just because you're an American

Your perspective is coming into focus.
Essentially, there is no difference between an American worker and a Chinese worker, other than the worker's wage.

To you it appears the prefered worker is the one that can be hired at the lower wage, regardless of which nation taxes the worker's income.

63 posted on 02/26/2003 8:33:44 PM PST by honway
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 62 | View Replies]

To: I'm ALL Right!
Well, after Clinton's reign of treason, I'm not sure there are any secrets left to be discovered. China already has them all... 6 posted on 02/25/2003 9:34 PM PST by I'm ALL Right! [ Post Reply

You can say THAT again!! --------------------------------------------------------------------------------

64 posted on 02/26/2003 8:37:37 PM PST by timestax
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: honway
Your perspective is coming into focus. Essentially, there is no difference between an American worker and a Chinese worker, other than the worker's wage.

Please learn how to read.

For one additional time: you first support a system that confiscates unreasonable amounts of a businessman's revenues under a false pretense of "fairness," then you support a system that imposes unreasonable regulatory burdens on him in the name of "justice," and then you get really upset when he decides to go elsewhere because the cost of doing business in America is too high because he isn't a "patriot."

Hey, you want to force him to lose money for your benefit, be my guest.

Just don't be too surprised if he goes out of business and leaves you without employment.

65 posted on 02/26/2003 8:41:03 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
bump
66 posted on 02/26/2003 8:50:32 PM PST by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
PING!
67 posted on 02/26/2003 9:13:53 PM PST by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Nevermind. Didn't see you were here already.
68 posted on 02/26/2003 9:15:22 PM PST by Orion78
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah; tallhappy; HighRoadToChina; Jeff Head; Orion78; Noswad; swarthyguy; Aaron_A; Paul Ross
Here you are again. Downplaying another China Threat thread. I guess it's what you are programmed to do.
69 posted on 02/27/2003 1:36:44 PM PST by GOP_1900AD (Un-PC even to "Conservatives!" - Right makes right)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: PhilDragoo
It will come out if we have to fight the Chicoms.

It's unfashionable to accuse people of high treason. In the fullness of time, I'm convinced the full story of the '96 campaign will see the light of day. There wasn't a state secret not for sale to the Chinese. They treated us like the Russians treated Berliner fraulein in 1945.


70 posted on 02/27/2003 9:27:08 PM PST by Man of the Right
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 26 | View Replies]

To: FreepForever
What did you think was my position that had you address me in your warning? I'm preaching the danger of China.

Some people think only of our own land being the target of Chinese agression, not understanding our country's need to resolve conflicts worldwide before they too severely effect the globe's security and economics. I'm not one of them.

I believe China is as vigilent as we are at evesdropping and could benefit from understanding how to resist our best efforts when they meet up with them.

Whether or not a Chinese aquisition of this communications company aids their cause, it seems to me the Chinese could do all the intercepting they have time for without spending the money to by into a market that has cutthroat competion to the point of not being able to remember to whom your tele bill is paid.

If the U.S. has any secrets left after the Clinton/Gore adminstration's sell-off, there is probably one of their guys working on a way to finish the deal.
71 posted on 02/27/2003 9:36:54 PM PST by Blue Collar Christian (Okie by proxy, raised by Yankees, temporarily Californian)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 40 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
Protectionism is not socialism. Try again.
72 posted on 03/03/2003 3:00:05 PM PST by nanomid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: nanomid
Sorry, kiddo.

Forcing businesses to shell out money for other people's benefit is socialism. Forcing them to stay here is socialism at its apex of achievement, when they built walls and machine-gun nests to keep people from leaving.
73 posted on 03/03/2003 3:18:54 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 72 | View Replies]

To: Poohbah
socialism - a system of society or group living in which there is no private property : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

protectionism - an advocate of government economic protection for domestic producers through restrictions on foreign competitors

nitwit - a scatterbrained or stupid person
74 posted on 03/03/2003 5:20:44 PM PST by nanomid
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: nanomid
socialism - a system of society or group living in which there is no private property : a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

Which your buddies in the AFL-CIO have advocated for years, in addition to practicing legalized extortion.

protectionism - an advocate of government economic protection for domestic producers through restrictions on foreign competitors

Which, when coupled with the socialism your buddies advocate, turns into North Korea.

nitwit - a scatterbrained or stupid person

Enough about you, already.

75 posted on 03/03/2003 5:25:49 PM PST by Poohbah (Beware the fury of a patient man -- John Dryden)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 74 | View Replies]

To: pttttt
Ping
76 posted on 03/03/2003 5:32:33 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/dowjones/20030301/bs_dowjones/20030228192700079:

Business - Dow Jones Business News

Global Crossing Deal Runs Into Government Review Snag

Fri Feb 28, 7:27 PM ET

By Dennis K. Berman, Staff Reporter of The Wall Street Journal

NEW YORK -- A federal government panel overseeing foreign investment in the U.S. has rebuffed the initial plan of two Asian technology companies to take control of bankrupt telecom carrier Global Crossing Ltd. , citing national-security concerns over one of the company's links to China.

The companies, Singapore Technologies Telemedia Pte. Ltd. and Hong-Kong based Hutchison Whampoa Ltd., withdrew a regulatory application earlier this week following a contentious meeting with officials from a secretive multiagency task force called the Committee on Foreign Investment in the United States, according to people familiar with the matter.

At the meeting, officials told executives from the companies that they were set to take the rare step of launching a formal investigation into the deal over concerns about Hutchison's ties to China, these people said.

The companies decided to withdraw the bid and restructure it instead of risking the possibility that the government would move to block it, these people said. The wrangling underscores the government's difficult balancing act in approving cross-border technology deals in a post Sept. 11, 2001, world - at once weighing national security while trying not to stifle foreign investment into a beleaguered sector of the economy.

Global Crossing maintains a world-wide 100,000-mile fiber-optic network, including 20,000 miles of domestic fiber linking 14 cities. Though Global Crossing carries only a small amount of U.S. government traffic, military and security officials are concerned about the ability of the Chinese government or related companies to tap into those lines for spying or stealing U.S. corporate trade secrets, people close to the matter said. What most concerns some officials, however, is the possibility that foreign ownership could impair the U.S. government's ability to lay wiretaps and other electronic surveillance.

The latest moves also mark a continued shift for the Bush White House, which came into office sharply critical of the Clinton administration's efforts to curtail the sale of certain pieces of equipment and software to countries like China on national-security grounds, only to begin adopting similar policies after the devastating Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks. The Bush administration is focusing on homeland security amid the build-up to a probable war with Iraq (news - web sites) and mounting tensions with North Korea (news - web sites), a Chinese ally.

One plan under consideration would have walled off a separate U.S. subsidiary, staffed with a board of U.S. citizens, to oversee the company's domestic assets. It was an imperfect solution, say people close to the matter, because the nature of Global Crossing's network means telecom traffic can be routed thousands of different ways, both through and outside the U.S.

What is now being considered, say these people, is a plan that would make Hutchison only a passive investor in Global Crossing. The company would essentially create a "proxy board" of four approved U.S. or allied citizens on the 10-person Global Crossing board of directors. A Hutchison director would also be prevented from serving as the reorganized company's chairman, as was planned by the companies' purchase agreement. "Instead of screening off the U.S. network from the parent, you'd be screening off Hutchison from the parent," says one person with knowledge of the plan, which hasn't yet been officially resubmitted for review.

Hutchison spokeswoman Laura Cheung said she couldn't comment on the confidential CFIUS process, but she expressed exasperation at suggestions Hutchison, or its Hong Kong-based chief executive Li Ka-shing, was an instrument of the Chinese government or that its Global Crossing investment could post a threat to U.S. security.

"The Chinese government doesn't have any officials on our board, and therefore has no influence at all over our business," she said.

The British government has already reviewed and cleared the transaction's national-security issues. Global Crossing operates a network for the country's embassies.

"We are not operators and will hold only hold 30.75% of the new Global Crossing," Ms. Cheung said.

Hutchison Whampoa is publicly traded on the Hong Kong and London stock exchanges. Among its U.S. ventures are a significant holding in online ticketer Priceline.com Inc. (NasdaqNM:PCLN - News) and an aircraft-maintenance joint venture with Lockheed Martin Corp. (NYSE:LMT - News) in the Chinese city of Guangzhou.

But Hutchison must confront two CFIUS members - from the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Defense Department - who view warily Mr. Li's mainland-China business ventures and current relations to Chinese government officials. The Treasury Department (news - web sites) chairs the committee, which also includes representatives from the White House, and departments of Commerce and State.

Until recently such concerns were given fairly short shrift within CFIUS, where trade-minded officials from the Commerce and Treasury Departments usually held sway and approved most deals with virtually no scrutiny.

A report released last year by the General Accounting Office (news - web sites), Congress' investigatory arm, found that of the 320 mergers and acquisitions openly reviewed by the committee between 1997 and 2001, only four were formally investigated and just one was actually blocked. Those numbers don't reflect the fact that most companies facing the possibility of a CFIUS investigation withdraw their bids before revising them substantially or dropping them altogether, but people familiar with the process say that CFIUS reviews are almost always a painless process for the companies involved. M

elinda Tan, a spokeswoman for Singapore Technologies Telemedia, said: "We are currently at the regulatory stage, getting approvals from the relevant authorities." She said what's happening now "is just part of the standard approval process."

Tisha Kresler, a Global Crossing spokeswoman, said the company continues to cooperate with the government. Treasury Department spokesman Tony Fratto declined to comment.

Some people in the industry said they are worried the case could lead to repercussions against investments going the other direction.

"The precedent is bad," said an Asia-based executive of a U.S. telecom company. "If China and Singapore can't buy into the U.S. market, how are we going to get these countries to open up?"

- By Dennis K. Berman, The Wall Street Journal, 212-416-3284

Yochi J. Dreazen in Washington and Matthew Pottinger in Hong Kong contributed to this report  

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

Copyright © 2003 Dow Jones. All rights reserved.

Copyright © 2003 Yahoo! Inc. All rights reserved.

77 posted on 03/04/2003 4:39:11 PM PST by pttttt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 76 | View Replies]

To: pttttt
GREAT NEWS! Thanks for the update pttttt.
78 posted on 03/04/2003 5:23:27 PM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]

To: Calpernia
Here is also a possibly helpful link:

http://www.itu.int/itudoc/itu-t/workshop/security/present/s1p2_pp7.ppt

79 posted on 03/04/2003 6:00:59 PM PST by pttttt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 78 | View Replies]

To: pttttt
http://story.news.yahoo.com/news?tmpl=story&u=/nm/20030303/tc_nm/telecoms_hutchisonwhampoa_dc_2

Now it looks like they are going to play "move the line of the law" to get around this.
80 posted on 03/05/2003 8:12:22 AM PST by Calpernia
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 77 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson