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.
While millions of Americans await the fate of 24 American military men and women being held as hostages by the Red Chinese, many people inside the Pentagon and intelligence agencies are nervously contemplating the catastrophic loss of America’s top-secret spy plane to the communists.
The man in the middle of negotiations for the release of the 24 hostages is Joseph Prueher – the US Ambassador to China. Appearing on ABC’s ‘Good Morning America’ program, Ambassador Joseph Prueher was asked if the Chinese had already boarded the EP-3 spy plane. Ambassador Prueher replied, “We have every reason to think the Chinese have been all over the airplane.”
Mr. Prueher should know. He’s been helping the Chinese climb all over US defense secrets for years. During his tour of duty in the Pacific, Admiral Prueher gave PLA officers tours of American military bases, pushed for Navy Seals to train China’s elite forces, looked the other way while COSCO tried to takeover a closed naval base in California, permitted a Chinese-controlled front group to seize the Panama Canal, downplayed the size and power of the PLA, hosted a dinner in Beijing for Loral and Hughes executives while they were under investigation, tried to implement a flawed ‘war plan’ to defend Taiwan that would give the battlefield edge to China, pressured Taiwan’s defense chief to enter talks with the PLA, blocked defense intelligence agents from spying on Chinese war games, and removed Chinese cities from the list of targets for American nuclear missiles.
The retired four-star Navy admiral was the chief cheerleader for Bill Clinton’s policy of ‘engaging China’ by giving the communists guided tours of America’s military bases. He considers the PLA officers to be “lao pengyou,” or old friends. Prior to his appointment as US ambassador, Prueher was commander of all US forces in the Pacific (CINCPAC). Admiral Prueher was famous for his numerous trips to Beijing to visit his PLA buddies and for his hospitality in showing America’s military secrets to the communists.
During his tour of duty as commander of Pacific Forces, questions were raised about his chummy relationship with the PLA and communist big shots in Beijing.’ Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz quoted an unnamed defense official in 1999 as saying, “The commander of US forces in the Pacific should be the military leader who is the most skeptical of the Chinese, not the most friendly.”
How friendly was Ambassador Prueher with the communist rulers in Beijing?
The pro-China admiral escorted Chinese PLA officials on a tour of an American nuclear attack submarine in Hawaii. Thanks to Admiral Prueher, the PLA also got inside the Top Gun training school in California for American pilots. No doubt that the aggressive flying skills of Chinese pilots against American aircraft in recent months comes, in part, from the expertise they gleaned from their tour of our Top Gun facility.
Top Gun wasn’t the only military facility that was opened to the Red Chinese military leaders. When Clinton and Gore were financing their 1996 campaign with PLA money, Admiral Prueher was meeting with Lt. Gen. Xiong Guangkai in September 1996. Known as the ‘Butcher of Beijing,’ Gen. Xiong was the top officer in the People’s Liberation Army during the bloody 1989 crackdown on Chinese freedom protesters. The general is also in charge of China’s military intelligence operations that are spying on the USA. It was General Xiong who delivered the veiled threat to nuke California by saying, “Americans care more about Los Angeles than Taiwan.” With Admiral Prueher’s help, Gen. Xiong visited American military bases numerous times before the China-loving Clintonistas left Washington.
Just three weeks after the treasonous Bill Clinton won reelection, Gen. Chi Haotian - China’s top PLA officer who killed American troops during the Korean War - led a delegation of 20 senior PLA officials on a two-week tour of American defense facilities, including the Pentagon. A Pentagon statement at the time explained that the defense agency hoped that the tour would “increase senior Chinese military leaders’ understanding of US national security policies, armed forces, and more broadly, American society.” The last American official who met with Gen. Chi was Admiral Prueher. The meeting with the Chinese PLA delegation took place in Hawaii on December 16-18, 1996. During a 1997 trip, Admiral Prueher feted Gen. Chi to a whirlwind two-week tour of American bases, fighter planes, warships, and armored forces. A year later, Prueher was present in Beijing with former Secretary of Defense William Cohen and Gen. Chi at the signing of the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement. The pact provided for regular meetings between American and Chinese military leaders so that “our naval and air forces have more contact,” said Secretary Cohen.
In December 1998, Admiral Prueher supervised the first joint military exercise involving the PLA Navy and the US Navy and Coast Guard. He sent the attack submarine USS Columbia and aircraft carrier USS Carl Vinson to Hong Kong for the event. The Xinhau News Agency quoted Prueher in December 1998 as saying the exercises were meant to “continue expanding our contacts to bring younger, more junior American and Chinese officers together.” The admiral praised the PLA’s role in the “smooth transition” between the two navies.
One of Admiral Prueher’s more controversial projects was a plan for American Special Forces to train PLA elite troops. Pentagon spokesman Kenneth Bacon confirmed the existence of the plan in July 1998. US Special Operations chief General Peter Schoomaker – who commands the Green Berets and Navy SEALS – conducts training missions in over 100 countries. The general said he supported the idea of training China’s special forces. The general was quoted in the South China Morning Post as saying that he was in discussions with Admiral Prueher about the details of the plan. Bacon said the goal was “getting our militaries to work together more smoothly.”
Prueher also supported a Clinton administration directive last year that sharply reduced US spying on PLA military activities. Washington Times reporter Bill Gertz reported in October 2000 that the no-spying rule was supported by US Ambassador Joseph Prueher. According to the report, US intelligence agencies wanted to spy on big PLA military maneuvers aimed at Taiwan. When Defense Intelligence Agency agents went to the South China region to spy on the war games, the Clinton administration – with Prueher’s full support – blocked the American spies.
Besides escorting PLA officers through US defense facilities, another top Clinton assignment for the ever-eager Admiral Prueher was to convince the US Congress that the PLA isn’t a military threat to the United States of America. He testified that the PLA wouldn’t be a threat for at least 15 years. When Loral and Hughes Aerospace transferred sensitive missile and rocket guidance technology to Red China, Admiral Prueher downplayed the impact as “marginal.” He said the technology transfers “only incrementally” increased Red China’s ballistic missile capabilities. “I don’t think what we have done with China…has created a big problem for us,” he was quoted as saying in Aerospace Daily in October 1998.
On March 16, 2000, Ambassador Prueher hosted a dinner meeting at his Beijing residence that included executives from Loral, Hughes, and Lockheed Martin. Also invited was the Chinese government minister in charge of the Aerospace Science and Technology Corporation. The communist-controlled company was linked by congressional investigators to illegal contributions to the 1996 Clinton/Gore campaign. Bill Gertz reported in the Washington Times that the meeting was arranged to discuss the suspended US export license for Loral’s ChinaSat 8. The satellite is part of a series of Chinese military communications satellites for a new command, control, communications and intelligence system that will link PLA forces together during a war. Despite the ongoing investigations at the time of the dinner, Ambassador Prueher justified the dinner as promoting trade.
Sen. Bob Smith, (Rep. NH) said at the time, “It certainly sounds inappropriate to me to be wining and dining two contractors under federal investigation for providing military secrets to an enemy nation.”
Another sore spot for Sen. Smith was Admiral Prueher’s involvement in pushing Taiwan into negotiations with the Red Chinese. The New Hampshire conservative senator raised serious questions in 1999 about Prueher’s attempts to pressure Taiwan Defense Minister Tang Fei into meeting with the communist PLA. The meeting at Pacific Command headquarters in Honolulu violated US policy by coercing the Taiwanese general into negotiating with China.
“He allegedly has violated the six assurances that defined Taiwan policy under Presidents Reagan and Bush…making unauthorized efforts last fall to persuade the Taiwanese military to start talks with the PLA,” Senator Smith wrote in an editorial on October 28, 1999. The senator had reason to believe that details were in a classified cable. “Admiral Prueher allegedly ordered deletion of the section of the classified US plan for the defense of Taiwan dealing with strategic matters, which has upset STRATCOM (Strategic Command) and riled the Air Force, causing them to object to Adm. Prueher’s actions.”
According to Sen. Smith, Prueher also strongly objected to American arms sales to Taiwan – especially submarines and advanced medium range air to air missiles.
Another pro-China action by Admiral Prueher was his flawed ‘war plan’ to defend Taiwan. Prueher made changes in planning for Taiwan’s defense immediately after he became commander of the Pacific armed forces. Sen. Smith said military officers within the Pacific Command provided him information indicating that Admiral Prueher made changes in American defense strategy that was favorable to the PLA in a war.
Prueher’s ‘war plan’ lost in two mock battles with China. The US Air Forces strenuously objected to Prueher’s plan because it would result in Taiwan’s defeat by Red China.
The Taiwan defense plan wasn’t the only military document that Prueher attempted to alter. As commander of US Pacific Forces, Prueher rejected the nuclear targeting recommendations of specialists within the Pacific Command. According to Pentagon insiders at the time, Admiral Prueher removed China cities and military bases from the list of targets for US nuclear missiles.
With Admiral Prueher’s appeasement of Red China, the question must be asked: Was the loss of the EP-3 plane the result of a mid-air collision with a Chinese fighter jet – or another deliberate technology transfer to the “Butchers in Beijing?”
Admiral Prueher was allso is one them responsible for the turn over of the panamal canal
Do you want our servicemen and women released ? Here's how to HELP
If my son or daughter was a HOSTAGE in China I would be worried to death for them. If my Mom or Dad was a HOSTAGE in China I would be very scared that I would be scared that I might never seen them again. Nobody can give a hug and a kiss goodnight like Mom and Dad, true ?
I believe the Chinese are in trouble if WE BOYCOTT ALL CHINESE GOODS !
We need to let the Chinese Communists know that we will fight for our country and all of its citizens. First we do so with our words. Then we get after your bank accounts, then come our guns. I am hoping we don't need to use guns to get our troops home, so I have put together this list of information and websites.
Just click HERE
If the communist Chinese got the apology they are looking for would they put the American crew on trial for murder? I mean after all the US admited they were at fault right? It kind of sick but it fits the hard line commie profile, remember Gary Powers.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This sounds like a possibility, doesn't it ?
Thank you in advance for your help.
China Consolidates Ties With Latin America
BUENOS AIRES, Apr 10, 2001 -- (Agence France Presse) Chinese President Jiang Zemin, on a 12-day tour of Latin America aimed at consolidating ties with the region, on Monday pledged to bolster bilateral cooperation efforts with Argentina.
At an official reception here Jiang spoke both in Spanish and Chinese, noting that his visit and Argentine President Fernando de la Rua's visit to China in September highlighted "the great importance we both place on bilateral relations."
De la Rua said "Argentina places a high priority on its relations with China with which over three decades it has developed solid ties in the areas of politics, economics and cooperation."
Neither leader mentioned the standoff between the United States and China over delays in releasing the 24-member crew of a U.S. spy plane held in China. Adding to tensions, is a pending decision by the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush on the sale of high-tech military equipment to Taiwan, which China regards as a renegade province. Jiang's high-profile visit to Latin America comes just a month before Taiwan President Chen Shui-bian's scheduled trip to four Central American nations May 21.
The Central American nations have become major Taiwanese political allies in recent years, analysts say, and the region where its most loyal allies around the world are local. The exception is Panama, where a Hong Kong-based consortium is now investing heavily. Since 1992, Taiwan has granted 180 million dollars in aid to infrastructure and production projects in the impoverished Central American region. Jiang however is focusing the trip mainly on South America and the Caribbean, with visits to Chile -- where he began the tour -- Argentina, Uruguay, Brazil, Cuba, and finally Venezuela. When in Chile Jiang made sure to note Latin America's "perseverance" in the past 100 years "to safeguard the sovereignty of their states and their national interests and rights," and predicted stability for the region in the coming century.
Here in Buenos Aires Jiang said that he was "pleaded to verify" that 29 years of diplomatic relations between Argentina and China "has resulted in an ever-growing exchange and collaboration" between the two nations. For his part, de la Rua described Jiang as "an old and great friend of Argentina's," and applauded "the advances made by both our countries in modernizing and opening up." The two leaders signed a number of protocols on commercial and biotechnology exchanges after holding a morning work meeting. Jiang is also scheduled to visit the Argentine Congress and Supreme Court, then attend a party hosted by de la Rua.
China-Argentina bilateral trade in 2000 reached 1.5 billion dollars. China imported 610 million dollars worth of items, while Argentina imported 930 million dollars worth of merchandise, a 30 percent increase over 1999, according to China's trade attache office here.
On Tuesday, Jiang is to leave for Uruguay. ((c) 2001 Agence France Presse)
bump
bump
bump
bump
bump
bump
Ambassador Prueher justified the dinner as promoting trade. Sen. Bob Smith, (Rep. NH) said at the time, “It certainly sounds inappropriate to me to be wining and dining two contractors under federal investigation for providing military secrets to an enemy nation.”
hah ... What does that ninny Smith know.
I think it was JUST ANOTHER SMART MOVE by the Bush Administration to send the Chicoms someone they could trust implicitly.
bump
Excuse me, but there was this little matter of a TREATY we signed with Panama, stating that we would turn the Canal over to them in 1999. That is a legitimate decision by the duly constituted civil authorities of this country--the Executive and Legislative branches.
Unless you believe that it is the military's role to violate the law of the land and overturn a foreign policy decision you and I personally disagree with, Prueher had nothing to do with the Panama Canal transfer. If you do think that Prueher should have engaged in such actions, then you simply want the United States to be another p*ssant banana republic...as long as YOU are in charge.
You, sir, are beneath contempt.
Eight years of treason against the US by the Clinton administration and US business; the selling of our secrets and vital interests to a known enemy - China, and the appointment of men to head the military who are questionable in their loyalty to the US. Plus an American society where over 50% of the people are socialists; a Congress that has been bought and sold by the Chinese -- this is just a few things that President Bush will have to deal with.
Huh.
I take it you want the military to swear some sort of Fahneneid to you, personally.
You seem to just assume that anyone who serves in the military during an administration you dislike is somehow disloyal, because they implement policy that goes against your personal beliefs. The officers I have worked with despise Clinton and everything he stands for--but they also hold the belief that a serving officer has no politics, but loyally carries out national policy decided by the duly constituted civil authorities.
If you question their loyalty to America, I definitely question YOUR loyalty to America--you seem to want a man on horseback to smash your enemies for you.
I just got a call from someone in downtown DC. He says he went by the Chinese ambassy, and our Freepers are still there. About 8-10 of them he said. Go Freepers go!
The Chicoms are our enemy. They are aggressively arming themselves and all our other enemies. They cannot be trusted.
I don't know the solution is, but appeasement will only lead to more aggression against us.
Get off your rotten stump. I know Clinton appointed people to head the military who do not put America's protection first -- social engineering was more important to them than our country's safety. Also, can you trust any military appointment made by Clinton who "loathes the military".
Our military men and women have suffered the terrors of the damned because of the Clinton administration. They have to grovel for money, being forced to get food stamps because of low pay. There are no parts for planes, no guns for practice, but they deliver pizza to Haiti; and when they came home had to bow the knee to Hillary the Hun when they were working as waiters at the White House. They were unable to even wear their uniforms because her highness thought uniforms offensive. Any military leader worth his salt would have protested the Clinton's behavior. I didn't hear any protests.
And you wouldn't hear those protests--if you do not understand the concept of obeying orders that you dislike, or about serving people who don't appreciate you, then you have no business talking about the military.
So it's the fault of the military leadership, and not the Congress and the President, that military pay has collapsed relative to civilian pay.
It's the fault of the military leadership, and not the CinC, that the military was sent on peacekeeping missions. What would you have them do, march the troops on the White House and have ol' General Shelton proclaim himself El Presidente?
Armchair warriors like you talk big, but you expect other people to do your dirty work.
And the hell of it is--those people do our dirty work, even when you insult them and revile them for it because they disobeyed YOUR whims.
Prueher is a big problem and his mighty Chinese contacts are not even returning his phone calls! But he is also part of the Bush China Plan. Says something about Bush doesn't it.
Very sad state of affairs....
Told y'all Prueher was a royal ChiCom boot-lickin' a--hole. GW has no business keeping him as ambassador to China, much less having him negotiate with the Chinese over the Hainan 24.
BUMP
BUMP
BUMP
Who are you, Hackworth?
Better than HW -
- this cookie actually knows something about which he speaks ...
go to this site to see traders to America
[
Reply |
Private Reply | To 19 | Top | Last ]
No, I'm not Hackworth. I'm the son of an Annapolis graduate who spent the best 20 years of his life defending your sorry a$$, followed by me spending eight years defending your sorry a$$. When I first stuck my right hand in the air, and took my oath to uphold and defend the Constitution, I read the thing to make sure I knew what I was upholding and defending. And I looked very carefully--NOWHERE in my copy of the Constitution do I see anything about the military going off on its own and making national policy when they don't like the CinC's policy.
The time for "protest" is BEFORE the order is given. After the order is given (and Clinton was NEVER one to consult with anyone who knew a damn thing about the military), the only appropriate response to an order you don't like is a hearty "Aye aye, sir," followed by carrying out that order to the best of your ability.
And if you think otherwise, there are any number of Latin American or African countries available for you to move to.
I assume you meant "traitors." And I didn't see Prueher's name on that page anywhere.
So, you defame people as "traitor" if they carry out a policy made by the duly constituted civil authority in this nation--if you personally disagree with it.
May I suggest a relocation to some nation that has an ex-colonel as El Presidente For Life? That form of government seems to be more congruent with your idea of how a country should be run.
Is it disloyal to ask our new POTUS to replace and/or retire ALL the people Clintigula had hand picked over the past eight years to carry out his socialist bidding? Hmmm?
That's really all I understood Swampfox to have said.
I support this POTUS unequivically; however, some of the carryover military people from the past eight years, are for me at best, questionable choices to be heading up key leadership slots within our military.
Keep in mind: Xlinton had no qualms ridding many military people who didn't, or wouldn't strictly mirror his ideology.
To say otherwise seems is to me, quite nieve.
Now if I've read you correctly, you're saying it would be unpatriotic for our beloved Shrub to do likewise, & clean house??
I am sorry & with all due respect, your position makes no sense to me, a'tall.
OK, y'all merely wish to hold a purge of those you SUSPECT of disloyalty. How charmingly Stalinist of you.
And, of course, you use the Clintonian "everybody else does it" defense.
How about removing them only when it is clearly shown that they are unsuited for the office, and not based on the fact that they were appointed by someone we don't like?
I'm saying that accusing these people of being un-American, despite lifelong service with little thanks from the likes of you, WITHOUT PROVIDING ANY EVIDENCE OTHER THAN GUILT BY ASSOCIATION, is beneath the dignity of someone who's supposedly a conservative.
go back to sleep
If you do think that Prueher should have engaged in such actions
YES
Eight years of treason against the US by the Clinton administration and US business; the selling of our secrets and vital interests to a known enemy - China, and the appointment of men to head the military who are questionable in their loyalty
Nice to know that you want a military strongman to throw out the folks who were ELECTED to public office when things don't go your way. If you have a problem with civilian control of the military--or only support it when it's congruent with your aims--go find a country with an ex-colonel who is now President For Life and live there.
Yes, yes, they are QUESTIONABLE in their loyalty. Lifelong service in the military is ignored because they happened to be appointed to command slots by Billy-Jeff. You KNOW that they have no love for America because you didn't personally approve of them.
You are a complete moron.
Stalin purged his military of people with "questionable" loyalty in 1936-1938. The result was that in 1941, the Red Army had people far too junior for their assigned jobs (the senior officers who should have been running things had all been shot), and those officers were deathly afraid of doing ANYTHING that smacked of personal initiative. Hell, Stalin even shot the guy who probably had a better grasp of mechanized warfare than anyone else (including the Germans) did--out of sheer paranoia. He made the Red Army loyal--at the price of making it impotent on the battlefield. On June 22nd, 1941, the Soviet Union made a down payment on the bill for that little bit of stupidity. The final tab was 20 million dead.
And now, you want to do the same thing--maybe without the executions, but still the same thing--based SOLELY on your belief that anyone who would accept any sort of leadership post in the Armed Forces under Clinton is OBVIOUSLY a traitor to your ideal of what America should be.
You're pond scum. No, I take that back--pond scum serves a valuable purpose, and I cannot fathom what you do besides waste oxygen. I can't believe that my family spent a total of 28 years in uniform, defending walking bags of excrement like you.
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.
[
Top
|
Latest Posts
|
Latest Articles
|
Self Search
|
Add Bookmark
|
Post
|
Abuse
|
Help!
]
FreeRepublic , LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 Forum Version 2.0a Copyright © 1999 Free Republic, LLC |