• Text smaller
  • Text bigger

I’ve got a simple question: Does Bill Clinton think he’s president of
the United States of America or the People’s Republic of China?

If you examine his policies, vis a vis Beijing, it’s difficult to
tell. In fact, truth be told, he seems to have done much more to
safeguard the security interests of China than of the United States.
Let’s look at the facts.

Clinton overruled his Pentagon, Justice Department and State
Department to ensure the Chinese would have access to sensitive
technology vital to improving missile guidance capability. The Chinese
already have at least 13 nuclear warheads targeted at the U.S. West
Coast. This deliberate technology transfer, personally approved by
Clinton over the objections of his national security advisers, defense
experts, diplomatic corps and Justice Department, represents a direct
threat to the lives of millions of Americans.

Furthermore, this is just the latest shocking development along these
lines. Despite the offensive military threat China represents to the
future of the United States, Clinton has done everything in his power to
coddle the repressive police state. Human rights abuses are overlooked.
Religious persecution is winked at. Nuclear proliferation into terrorist
states is casually dismissed. Threats to nuke Los Angeles are ignored. A
massive military modernization program is deliberately disregarded.
Clinton even personally intercedes to suggest that a subsidiary of the
Red Chinese army get control of a strategic Naval facility in Long
Beach, Calif. Clinton has also overlooked the fact that China now has
control over both ends of the Panama Canal.

More recently, when China’s peaceful neighbor India becomes alarmed
by such developments and decides to test its own nuclear weapons, the
U.S. quickly slaps it with sanctions. This despite the fact that India
has no nuclear weapons targeted on the U.S. and no plans to do so. Its
historical threat is from China, with which it has had numerous
territorial disputes.

Clearly, China represents the gravest economic, political and
military challenge to the United States for the foreseeable future. It
is a totalitarian regime intent on expansion of its borders and
influence.

Today, several investigations are under way trying to determine
whether illegal campaign contributions from Chinese military
intelligence and other massive political donations from U.S.
corporations doing business with China’s army had any influence on these
critical national security decisions. But could greed and the desire for
power alone explain such treasonous decisions? Or is there an
ideological component involved in these shocking actions?

Some Clinton defenders say there is no way any American president
would sell out his country for campaign contributions. Indeed, it’s hard
for anyone to imagine the possibility. Yet, those funds clearly indicate
that China believed its best interests were served by the continuation
of a Clinton presidency. The Chinese illegally funneled money into his
campaign, and they got what they wanted.

Think about it.

Why would India face sanctions from the United States, while China
receives the royal treatment of a most favored nation?

Why would the president sidestep the recommendations of his top
national security, legal and diplomatic advisers to provide China with
sophisticated high technology it could use to destroy our country?

Why would Bill Clinton put the lives of millions of Americans at risk
to curry favor with the brutes in Beijing?

Years ago, Hollywood made a movie called “The Manchurian Candidate,”
in which the Communists infiltrate the American political system with a
subversive, “sleeper” agent. Just the fact that recent developments
remind Americans of such an unthinkable scenario should be cause for
alarm. Whether Clinton’s actions are the result of a calculated plan to
destroy our nation’s security, or the result of greed and lust for
power, or the result of simple incompetence, two facts are undeniable:
America’s position in the world has been weakened; China has been
strengthened.

Is it possible Bill Clinton has more loyalty to Beijing — or other
things — than he does to the United States of America? I don’t know the
answer to that question. But, depending upon who writes the history
books of the future, it is increasingly likely that he will one day be
known as “the Manchurian President.”

  • Text smaller
  • Text bigger
Note: Read our discussion guidelines before commenting.