CBSIC Research Attachment to Working Reports



**********************************************************************
*                                                                    *
*      United, We Must Stand Up For Our Own Rights and Interests     *
*      =========================================================     *
*                                                                    *
*           a Working Report by the CBS Incident Committee           *
*                                                                    *
*              submitted to the IFCSS 6th Congress                   *
*                                                                    *
*                     July 23 ,  1994                                *
*                                                                    *
**********************************************************************


       Attachment III:    Background Studies on the CBS Incident
       =========================================================

 
             Dong Xiao, Huang Lin, Luo Ning, 
             Gao-Qiu Zhu, Cao Yulin, Chun Yang Peng
             HXYUE@WSUHUB.UC.TWSU.EDU


    The background research is an on-going project, since it requires
source collection and analysis.  The motivation of this project is to
find the truths and lies in this outrageous report, and the material
it based on. 

    The only cited source in the CBS report is Mr. Eftimiades, and
his newly published spy book.  Therefore we have concentrated on the
book, and the sources it has cited, and interviews that Mr. Eftimiades
has given (See Appendices I, II, III.)

    This report will be divided into four parts, Part One deals with the 
spy book written by Mr. Eftimiades;  Part Two deals with the sources of 
many lies and distortions; Part Three are case studies of relevant
libel cases or CBS related cases.  Part Four are analyses and discussions
about the CBS report and the consequent CBS VP reply letter.

    Part One and Four are materials published on CCF, CND and CBS-IC
News Releases.   The studies in Part Two and Three have been circulated
within the CBS Incident Committee, for our members information and strategy 
planning. 

    Note that these reports are about the facts and statistics in
Chinese intelligence efforts that the CBS report is supposedly based on.
We Do Not wish to either advertise for the books and documents
referenced here, nor do we want to spread these espionage stories
further, no matter they are true stories, faked stories or distorted 
stories.



Part One:  The Spy Book 
=======================

By Dong Xiao

Section I:  Overview

    The following messages have been served as fcbs-c 
internal case study of the book "Chinese Intelligence Operations" 
written by Mr. Nicgolas Eftimiades.  They are not scholarly book 
reviews, emphasis are made toward the CBS incident.

    The book appeared to be professionally written, with
balanced materials and facts.  It describes the Chinese intelligence
operations in detail, and it is convincing.  

    It is NOT the impression I had about the book after the
CBS report.  The CBS report does NOT reflect objectively what the
book presents.  The CBS report picked ONLY a small part of the book
about Chinese intelligence recruitment,  misrepresented or in some
cases
DISTORTED deliberately the facts quoted in the book, and added
fabrications.

    The book is NOT about "Chinese spy network in America"!

1)  The title of the book describes the subject well, it's 
about the Chinese intelligence operations, in the world.  Many 
examples are from Africa and Asia, where the Chinese communist
party has/had "friendship aids".  

2)  It's about intelligence.  Spying is only part of intelligence 
work.  Intelligence is information gathering.  As the author 
indicated clearly: (page 114)  "gathering information on friends 
and adversaries should not necessarily be viewed as an evil act.  
Often, the lack of knowledge about another country's intentions 
serves to destabilize relations between states."

    He gave the example of Larry W. T. Chin, who delivered 
President Nixon's policy toward China to the Chinese intelligence
agencies as early as 1970, which may very well serve as a door knock
and prompted the Chinese government to define a policy that lead
to the normalization of China and the US.
And we all know how intelligence work served in the Middle east
peace talks.

    Unfortunately, (and maybe fortunately), Mr. Chin's case is 
the ONLY genuine Chinese spy case ever convicted in the United
States.  And it is the ONLY concrete evidence that one could 
cite as a proof that China DOES have spies.

********************************************************************

    We DO NOT argue the fact that China has spies, and we DO NOT
intend to hide the fact that China has spies.  Some people are
scared and felt threatened by the report, but afraid that if we
counter the CBS slander, more people will know about the presumed
Chinese spies.  Well we should not be afraid of revealing the
fact that China has spies.  Instead, we should make it known in 
public that WE, the ordinary Chinese people, ARE NOT SPIES!

********************************************************************


3)  It is about various intelligence operations. The book
centered around the MSS (Ministry of State Security) activities,
domestically and internationally.  We will get into more detail on
how the CBS distorted facts in the book in the following sections.


Section II:  The IFCSS was mentioned as a source of spy threat!


    Ironically, the IFCSS is quoted to substantiate the MSS agents
activities in the US, among the Chinese dissidents. 

    "The MSS actively infiltrates prodemocracy dissident groups.
Senior members of the Washington, D.C.-based International Federation
of Chinese Scholars and Students (IFCSS) stated that numerous MSS 
agents identified themselves to dissident groups immediately after the
Tiananmen incident".  (page 38)

    Of course the CBS report did NOT mention anything about one of
the main goals  of MSS activities, to monitor, domestically and
internationally, the Chinese citizens,  which is why there are a 
relatively big number of possible agents, if you count the informants 
in.  If China really had a "biggest" spy network in the US, it would
not be going after the US secrets, it would be aftering the ordinary Chinese
citizens who are accused by the CBS as possible agents. Ironic, isn't 
it.


Section III:  About the "fish in the bottom"


    Accusing ordinary Chinese as potential spies, "sleeper spies",
or the notorious "fish in the bottom of the ocean" statement is probably
the most insulting and damaging statement to the Chinese public in the 
US.  It is in the
book (page 61).  However, the CBS did NOT present the story as the 
book did.

    It is in a chapter titled "Agent Recruitment Methods".  
In most of this chapter, the author described in detail
how the MSS recruit FOREIGN (ie. non-Chinese) nationals
to work for them.  The CBS conveniently IGNORED the non-Chinese
agents (plenty of examples, most interesting one is what the
movie Ms. Butterfly based on, a Frenchman felt in love with
a Chinese opera singer, who turned out to be a bisexual, and
the MSS get the Frenchman to work for them in return for 
allowing their marriage, they went back to France and spied
for China for years until they are caught by the French
counter-intelligence).  No, the CBS ONLY tells the American 
public that "ordinary CHINESE" can be "spies", but they
did NOT (or dare NOT) say that the ordinary Americans are
actively recruited, TOO.  And there are examples in the book!

    Also, CBS DISTORTED the recruitment procedure presented
in the book.  Remember what the CBS report said:

    "It all starts here in Beijing. A Chinese student or scientist
businessperson applies for a visa to go to the US.  Then the Ministry
of State Security starts asking questions: ...".

    The sentence structured "A ..student OR ... OR ... applies",
so it seems to be a STANDARD procedure of visa application that
ANYONE will be asked "questions".

     In the book: (page 61)

    "The following narrative describes the recruitment and
deployment of ONE such agent.

    "A PRC national was recruited as a low-level agent by
provincial MSS officials. The source had two academic degrees 
in the hard sciences. The recruitment process started approximately 
six months before the prospective agent was to travel to the
United States ..."

    Clearly, the book was discussing a specific person, withholding
his/her name.  But it was an INDIVIDUAL, not "a student" in general
terms!  The rest of the procedure was simplified by the CBS, with
sensational sentences that I'll single them out in next message.


Section IV:  CBS fabrications 


    The CBS "special investigation" of course may not be based
on this book alone.  But some of the CBS quotations are just outright
un-characteristic of Chinese officials.  Those quotations in the book 
are, however, more convincing.

    "You belong to our organization".  Remember how sensational it is:

Man:    Never forget, you belong to our organization.
CHUNG: 'never forget,' they told him, 'you belong to our organization.'
Man:    You were sent by our organization.
CHUNG: 'You were sent by our organization, and this organization belongs
        to the Communist Party.'
Man:   ...Communist Party.

    It sounded mafioso, doesn't it?!  These quotations are not in
the book.  The interview is absurd, and do we believe that the CBS
has acquired an FBI tape interviewing a real Chinese spy and was allowed
to show it?  I dare to bet that this is made up!   The Chinese don't
talk that way.  The Italian gangsters do.  It is dramatization!

    The book quoted something like:

    "They also reminded him to 'remember your family, the Communist
party, and our country", while overseas.


Section V:  Some favorable reviews


    The book got favorable reviews from James R. Lilley, who wrote
that "Mr. Efitimiades has written an important book on Chinese
intelligence which is both well documented and well grounded in history.
He describes clearly and factually the methods, objectives, organization,
and history of Chinese intelligence backed up with case histories and
documentation."

    Lilley's comments were correct.  The CBS picked the bits
in the book involving Chinese nationals and distorted them to slander 
the ordinary Chinese in the U.S. 

    The forward of the book was even written by a Chinese scholar,
Chong-Pin Lin of American Enterprise Institute.   He is also disatisfied
with the CBS slanderous report.


Section VI:  On the MFN issue


    Here's the "spy" aspect of the MFN issue. (page 40)

    (A Chinese embassy official who defected to the US) "Mr. Xu 
disclosed that as an embassy official one of his PRIMARY task was 
to pressure Chinese students not to support a revocation  of most 
favored-nation (MFN) trading status for China. ..."



Section VII:  Chinese agents


    There are plenty of examples of Chinese agents in the US and 
elsewhere in the world.  Those instances in the US are all heard of
by most Chinese here.  They are mostly embassy/consulate officials
or NCNA journalists.  There are suspicions of visiting scholars
stealing secrets, the neutron bomb secrets from LBL is one example.

*******************************************************************

    There are no instances of ordinary Chinese coming to America by
"planeloads" (this word is not in the book by the way) that are
caught spying.  

*******************************************************************

    There are also Hongkong and Taiwan businessmen who are
caught exporting restricted technology to China via a third country.
Some of these could be considered espionarge cases, however, the author also
acknowledges that many of these businessmen don't even hide the
final destination of the products.  They just frankly tell the
American manufacturers that these purchases are going to China and
the products are sold and delivered.  So these are not exactly
spy cases, but normal however illegal business practices.

    Lastly, as mentioned in Section IV, non-Chinese
are also actively pursued by the Chinese intelligence and plenty
of examples of these agents are caught.  Only the Chinese are
"future spies" is a distortion of the original book!



Part Two:  Studies on Other References  
======================================

By Dong Xiao

Section I:  Some frequently quoted Chinese spy stories

Source:

    "Kang Sheng et les Services Secrets Chinois" 

       by Roger Faligot and Remi Kauffer

    "The Chinese Secret Service" (TCSS)  

       --- English version by Christine Donougher.

    This is a rather famous book, and after reading it,
I find it worth the fame.  Anyway it is one of the major reference
book by Mr. Eftimiades.  This book is of a different style, while Mr.
Eftimiades' book appears to be professional and impersonal, this book is
based on very personal stories and do not make statistics claims.

    Most of the stories are French experience as expected.  Most of
it is about Kang Sheng, only the last three chapters deals with the
so called "Deng Xiaoping era".

1.  Some history about the US export to China: (page 425 TCSS)

    China was classified as category "Y" for export after 1949, which 
is the same as the Soviet bloc, meaning that "transatlantic industrialists"
could not export to China.  After the Korean war, China was put to
category "Z", which means total embargo.  After 1972 Nixon's visit,
China was put back to "Y" again.  In 1980, Carter administration created
a special category "P" for China, which applies less control on 
technology transfers, including certain equipment with potential
military use.  In 1983, Reagan administration put China into category "V",
which is the category for western powers and countries friendly to the
US.  This, of course, does not mean that China can get everything.

2.  The story about the Chinese tie dipping delegation is indeed in
    this book. (also page 425 of TCSS)

    "This kind of spying may be relatively low-level but it is none 
the less harmful.  In the 1970's [Note the date --DX] French Military
Security investigators laughed when they discovered how the Chinese 
visitors took a close interest in the photographic processes of the 
German firm AGFA: delegates wearing very fine ties would dip them
nonchalantly into the developing bath.  Naturally, these ties were as
special as their owners, who cut the ends off them as soon as the
visit was over and them dispatched them to Beijing for analysis".

    I might add that they may have learned the trick from the
Japanese (finding the source will be interesting) but it seems to
be a fact.  However it has nothing to do with the CBS libel, just
a side note.

3.  Other examples that Eftimiades used from this book:

a)  Lin Kuang Shin and Da Chuan Zheng case (exporting radar components).
    They worked for the PLA to acquire US communications equipment,
    after the Falkland war rang a bell on PLA high ranking officials.
    They really had a network of businessmen that "virtually covered 
    the whole country" as Andrew K. Ruotolo Jr., the Fed Attorney who
    dealt with the case, was quoted. (page 426)

b)  Bernard Boursicot and Shi Peipu case (Ms. Butterfly) in France.
    (page 432)

c)  Yu Zhenshan (who allegedly related to both Chairman Mao and President
    Chiang Kai-Shek) and Larry W.T. Chin case. (page 443-452).

***

    While these stories are true, they by no means whatsoever confirm
what the CBS alleges.  These are isolated incidents, and as normal
as any other "western powers" or "countries friendly to the US" who
still keep an eye on the US secret technology developments.



Section II:  Senate Intelligence Committee Report in 1986.

Source:

   "Meeting the Espionage Challenge: A Review of United States
    Counter-Intelligence and Security Programs"

    by Select Committee on Intelligence, United States Senate.
    (99th Congress, 2rd Session, Report 99-522)

    First of all, Mr. Eftimiades seemed to have copied a lot of
languages from this report, including facts and definitions.

    This report was written when the Soviet Union was still the
major threat.  It has only one section and a few sentences deal
with the PRC intelligence.  In fact this report had written that (p.19)

    "The PRC is not now in strategic competition with the United States.
Indeed, the United States has fundamental interests in maintaining
friendly relations with the PRC and promoting its modernization,
to include selective upgrade of its military defensive capabilities."

    However, this report is the source of a very important claim in Mr.
Eftimiades' book, and probably what the CBS primary allegation of 
"biggest spy network"  based on also.  BUT, let's read the language 
carefully.


CBS (May 19, 1994):
===================
"CHUNG: Coming up next, Eye on American. Tonight, the biggest spy network
in American. We'll tell you who's running it and how."

CIO by Eftimiades (1994, page 27):
==================================
   "Most Chinese clandestine collection activities are not sophisticated
operations, but their numbers compensate for this weakness . To Conduct
espionage in the United States the MSS draws on the services of
   --- 1,500 Chinese diplomats and commercial representatives
   --- 70 PRC establishments and offices
   --- 15,000 Chinese students arriving annually
   --- 10,000 representatives traveling in 2,700 delegations each year
   --- a large ethnic Chinese community."

Senate Committee Report (1986, page 19):
========================================
   "The PRC has several intelligence services whose personnel are 
represented among the approximately 1,500 Chinese diplomats and
commercial representatives located at 70 PRC establishments and offices
in the United States. They also have some access to the approximately
15,000 Chinese students and 10,000 individuals arriving in 2,700
delegations each year.  PRC intelligence also seeks to exploit the
large ethnic Chinese community."


    As we can see, the Senate report is very reasonable and in fact
THE correct way of presenting the facts.  It wrote that the PRC
"have SOME ACCESS" to the 15K student and 10K visitors each year.

    Mr. Eftimiades has already distorted the original language by
saying that PRC "draws on the services of" 15K students and 10K
visitors.  This is a very clever distortion, since you can "draw
service of" ALL of them, or ONE OR TWO of them.

    Now came the CBS, it becomes "biggest spy network"!  Which is
not only distortion, but a complete falsification or fabrication.
Sure, (15K+10K) x 10years is such a huge number that "biggest" is
definitely an underestimate!

    In addition, this might even be the source of that CBS vice
president Mr. Venados claim that there are "hundreds" of Chinese
in the US are Chinese spies.  (This thread has been developed
in the letter to Mr. Venados.)




Section III:  Possible Warnings of Spies 

Source:

(SIC Report, 1986, same as in Section II)


    In the CBS report, Connie Chung alleges that the FBI has warned American
companies watching out for Chinese spies.  

    However, there is a general guideline in the Senate Intelligence
Committee Report (1986. 99-522) about the "awareness briefing"
against foreign intelligence agents, mostly against the Soviet bloc
I might add.

    It is indeed interesting that the Security Manual developed in this
committee does call attention to "communist country nationals", however
it has not put an hammer on a particular race.

    Please note that anti-discrimination laws specifically mentioned
about discrimination against country of origin.  Maybe communist
countries are indeed a different category that should be discriminated.
This is worth some legal studies.

  The following is from the senate report:

    The first part is warnings to Americans who have security clearance:

****

    "Based upon the lesson of Bell/Zacharski, and other similar cases,
awareness briefings should stress the following:

"What should you know

    "There is potential danger in any sustained contact with a com-
munist-country national (and not just with Soviets).  You are not re-
quired to avoid all contact; just be careful.

    "Recruitment is a subtle, gradual process (a 'long, bit-by-bit
thing', Bell called it).  Cultivation may last for months or years and
initial active involvement may have nothing to do with espionage 
in any recognizable form. 

[Note: "recruitment" here means spy recruitment.  -- DX]

    "Recruitment may involve no elements of blackmail or threat, so
those who regard themselves as 'clean-living' may nonetheless be
susceptible to this sort of activity.

    "Positive inducements will involve psychological ploys (friendship,
flattery sharing of common opinions/interests) as well as (and usu-
ally prior to) material offerings.

    "'Entrapment' once it comes is as much as a psychological as a ma-
terial entanglement, and commitment (as in Bell's case) may only
be recognized after the fact.

"What you should do

    "As a cleared contractor employee, you must report to the security 
supervisor: 1) all acts of espionage or suspected espionage, a) any
attempt to gain unauthorized access to classified information, 3)
any compromise or suspected compromise of classified information,
4) plans for travel to (or through) a communist-controlled country,
5) plans to attend any professional meeting where communist country
nationals may be in attendance, 6) plans to host a facility visit
by communist country nationals.

    "You should (for your own protection) report any contact, particularly
sustained contact, with a communist-country national, even if
purely personal and seemingly casual.  In this way you avoid any
suspicions which might arise regarding your own conduct and permit
authorities to warn you if the individual is suspected of 
intelligence involvement.


***

    The next part is for companies watching possible spies, these are
of interest to us.  -- DX

***

    "POSSIBLE ESPIONAGE INDICATORS: 'AN OUNCE OF PREVENTION'

    (Source: U.S. Air Force Office of Special Investigations (AFOSI)
                   (Adapted from TIG Brief 18, 1982))

    "From an analysis of confirmed espionage cases, AFOSI has developed
a listing of characteristics shared by several of the spies in
varying degrees.  While no element of this list of 'warning-signs' is,
in itself, proof of an individual's involvement in espionage, observation
of such characteristics in the behavior of an individual with
access to classified information should be a matter of concern to security
and supervisory personnel.  Even where espionage is not
present, several of the characteristics may be indicative of problems in suitability of security which cannot be prudently ignored.

    "The list as presented here has been adapted to reflect the special 
requirement applicable to Defense contractors under the Industrial
Security Manual for Safeguarding Classified Information (ISM,
DoD 5220.22-M), as well as requirements for DIS employees.

    "Behavior patterns of possible significance include the following.

    "Attempts to expand access to classified information, though 
repeated volunteering for special assignments with additional access 
or inquiries concerning information for which the individual has no 
need to know.

    "Unauthorized removal of classified material from the work area,
by making extra carbons or copies or placing of classified materials
in briefcase, purses, gym bags, etc.

    "Repeated or unusual overtime, especially unaccompanied, whereby
making the individual arranges to be alone or unobserved in an office
containing classified material.

    "Falsifying destruction records by requesting certification or 
witnessing signatures for destruction of classified materials which the
individual has not actually seen destroyed.

    "Sudden, unexplained affluence as indicated by purchase of expensive
cars, real estate, jewelry etc,; by display of large amounts of
cash; or by lump-sum repayment of significant debts, large stock
purchases, or opening of substantial savings accounts --in the
absence of some legitimate source of increased income.  Unexplained
affluence is of particular concern when it follows a period of leave or
travel.

    "A pattern of recurring travel, within the United States or (especially)
abroad, perhaps 2 to 4 times per year, without apparent recreational
or business purpose.  Married individuals who travel for tourism or
recreation unaccompanied by family members may also be of concern.

    "Falsification of locations visited on leave statements or trip 
reports.  Also reluctance to describe or ignorance concerning places
supposedly visited.

    "Travel to Communist countries or on communist-flag ships or 
aircraft not involving an organized tour and not explained by business
or family connections.  ANy attempts to visit communist countries
without complying with applicable reporting requirements is of
particular concern.

    "Repeated association with Communist-country nationals without
bona fide business purpose or without required reporting.

"NOTE FOR CONTRACTORS

    "Under the ISM cleared contractor employees must report anticipated
contacts with communist-country nationals at professional
meetings or through facility visits.  A forthcoming change to the ISM
will require contractor employees to report 'all questionable or suspicious
contacts with nationals or representatives of communist countries,' i.e.,
any contact 'determined to consist of an actual, probable or possible
hostile intelligence collection effort.'

"NOTE OF DIS EMPLOYEES

    "DIS employees, as well as all Federal employees, are required to 
report improper or suspicious contacts by representatives of any
foreign interest, just as contractors are required to report.  THese
naturally include contacts ny communist-country nationals.

    "While none of the indicators listed is proof of espionage, any
pattern of conduct on the part of a cleared employee which suggests 
the possibility of improper activity should be reported by supervisors
or managers to the Facility Security Supervisor.  Security Supervisors
should report in turn to the Defense Investigative Service and the FBI.

    "Where there is doubt whether information should be reported, it
should be furnished to the proper authorities for evaluation.  Security
Supervisors should be aware that in two 1967 cases the U.S. Court
of Appeals for the 4th Circuit held that a contractor is not
liable for defamation of an employee because of reports made to
the U.S. Government pursuant to the Industrial Security Manual.  The Court
stated in essence that such reports are privileged, since the contractor 
in executing the requirements of the Manual dons the cloak of a 
federal official.

    "Such reports do not of course constitute incrimination in 
themselves, and adverse action by government activities can only be 
taken with probable cause and due process.  But the effectiveness of
U.S. security and counterintelligence efforts is directly and vitally
dependent upon early reporting of any possible instances of
compromises or espionage.

*****

   Our comments:

1.  The CBS report mentioned something of the FBI warned American 
    corporations about espionage efforts.  These guidelines should
    be what the FBI based on.  There is no mention about a particular
    ethnic group.  If there is a comment in those warnings about
    Chinese nationals, it is clearly racist and unconstitutional.

2.  It made clear that reports to the authority about some specific
    behaviors of a certain individual does not constitute defamation,
    which is NOT what the CBS did!  A defamation is to spread 
    "privileged" information, truthful or not, in the public!

3.  These guidelines are about defence contractors, which needs tight
    security clearance.  It is not about everyone on the street
    or any business in the corner.




Section IV:  Racist nature of the spy allegations (L. A. Times)


    Another major source for Mr. Eftimiades' book is an L.A.Times
article: "China Seen Using Close U.S. Ties for Espionage", dated
Nov. 20, 1988, by Mr. William Overand (Times Staff Writer), also
contributed are Time staff writer Dan Morain in San Francisco
and Times research librarian Tom Lutgen.

    This article presented a paranoid picture of some FBI officials
in Los Angeles area, about the presumed Chinese spy activities.
It cited denial (as well as some evidence) from Chinese officials
and it also quoted Chinese American leaders discontent about the
allegations, in California.

    The article is also the source of some numbers that are quoted
frequently.

1.  "50% illegal exports"

    The article said, in 1988, China is "now the primary target for
U.S. Customs agents in about 50% of all illegal technology transfer
cases on the West Coast."

    The original source is a Mr. Hensley, who heads Customs enforcement
on the west coast.

    Mr. Hensley also said 20% investigations are about Soviet Union,
and 20% for Iran.

    The time is 1988, the place is in California, the cases are those
investigated.  This means that China was a major target, it does not
say that there are 50% of illegal exports are related to China.  It
only means that the US Customs spend 50% of their resources chasing 
China! 


2.  Racist claims

    The article said "FBI officials themselves say they fear their
comments about Chinese spying might be interpreted by some as racist."
No shit!  The FBI concentrated on illegal exports, in this report.
They are quoted at one hand that the Chinese intelligence only
work in the Chinese population, but on the other hand, they have
indicted, and in fact convicted American companies and American
individuals for illegal export to China. 

    The FBI official quoted in this article is a Harry J. Godfrey III,
who was the head of FBI counterintelligence in Los Angeles.  

    If anyone who gets an impression that China only recruit Chinese is
from this man.  And he seems to me a clear-cut racist!  Look, he cited,
followed by Mr. Eftimiades and the CBS, illegal export cases involving
China and some times Chinese individuals, as "facts" and "evidence"
that there are "ordinary" Chinese spying for China.  However, they
do not even have a flash of thought, when Americans are caught relating
illegal export to China, that they could be spies, too!

    No, the white Americans are patriotic citizens who just made 
mistakes exporting to China.  The ethnic Chinese exporting to China, 
however, are spies!

    That's what the CBS Vice President concludes!  

    He used a much smaller fraction to prove his point though, that 
there only "one in eight" or 12% of illegal exports are related to 
China. (This originated from US Department of Commerce reports).

3. American firms and individuals caught

   One instance was quoted in this article.  In 1983, Dual Systems
Control Corp. and two officials from the firm, Frederick Weekes and
Bernardus J. Smit, were indicted and Smit was convicted and sentenced
6 months in prison and fined $60K for violating export licence laws.


4. imaginations

   There is a lot of paranoia reflected in this article, which I'll
write a separate analysis.  Just quote here, the phrases "assumes" and
"considers" and such are use to guess (in Chinese, it's "xiang3 dang1
ran2") the Chinese spy threats.

   Some US intelligence "assume Chinese intelligence agents are on the
consular staff in Los Angeles",  the FBI "considers the CHinese to be
the most active foreign intelligence gatherers in California".

5.  Major Catch!

   This article, as well as each and every writings about Chinese spies,
seems to have this one and only golden example, Larry W.T. Chin.  
The article admits, "apart from the Chin case and related incidents, 
however, the FBI has no specific examples of CHinese spying that are
ever publicly discussed.  Most officials describe the overall problem
only in GENERAL terms."



    
Section V:  Paranoia about Chinese "spies"


    By reading the L.A.Times article: "China Seen Using Close 
U.S. Ties for Espionage" by William Overand, which is a major
source for Mr. Eftimiades' book and therefore the CBS' report,
the picture becomes clearer.  This spy brouhaha is essentially
based on some vivid imaginations of some paranoid individuals,
who, sees the decline of the Soviet bloc, try to justify their
salary from the tax payers by implicating the Chinese, who,
in their minds, are week, dirty, lackluster and impotent,
..., and the right target to shit on.

    We will just list what the article presented to show how
paranoid some people are about the imaginary Chinese spies.
It's like Don Quixote fighting the windmills, although the
windmill did not cause any harm, it could be destroyed because
of the paranoia.

    Note that quite a number of these paranoid individuals works
for the government.  However they complained that the US government
is too nice and friendly to the Chinese!  The article paraphrased
"top U.S. counterintelligence officials" as saying that PRC's agents
"have surpassed the Soviets" and it is the "result of the 'friendly
nation' status conferred on China by the United States". 
(1st paragraph)  It was 1988.  The next year, China would show a
massacre to the world on TV and is not friendly with the US anymore.
And these people must be celebrating to have a target to shoot on.

1. the way to collect intelligence

    Mr. Harry J. Godfrey III, head of FBI counterintelligence in LA
quoted saying: "When you look at the Chinese, you have many small
individual collecting one small part at a time, and you don't have
the quality of case that our country will take to prosecute as far
as espionage."  "If you have a Soviet or East bloc spy case, you
have fewer people collecting more information. If you detect it,
it's clear what you have."

    In Mr. Eftimiades' book, he reflected, if not copied, the same
sentiment.

    The problem is, what on earth is espionage.  If you pick a leaf
off a tree from a park, you are not considered a thief.  But if
you pick all the leaves, or dig out the entire tree, it is theft.
If a Chinese touched some sensitive information, or made a copy
of a piece of information that he or she will use in his or her
work, it is NOT espionage!  A spy is a spy because he steals
systematically for a government!  Otherwise, he is NOT a spy!

    What a Chinese can do to avoid suspicion if he or she will
be a spy for picking a leaf off from a tree?  Oh Yeah, you don't
pick leaves.  You probably can't go to the public restrooms, too,
since you could be exchanging information there with your case
officer!

    According to these paranoid individuals, the Chinamen are not
supposed to do anything to begin with.  They should not be here
to begin with!  So if they did something made their eyes sore, 
they cry fire!   

2. the alleged spy "payment"

    So to prove that every Chinaman is a spy, the Quixotic Godfrey
has to prove that the these people are paid by a government, the
Chinese government.  How?  Mr. Godfrey said, "The Chinese form of
payment is a lot more subtle too [compared with the Soviets]. "
"Instead of a lump sum cleared through a dead drop, they will offer
legitimate business opportunities."

    How smart.  Anyone who does business with China are "paid" by
the Chinese government, and therefore a spy!

    When a man goes paranoid as far as this, he can't be convinced 
or debated.  He either has evil intentions with deep racial hatred,
or he needs a doctor.  (I think Mr. Don Quixote was a nice man but 
needed a doctor.  I am not sure about Mr. Godfrey, or CBS producers
for that matter.)

3.  Consulate as spy headquarters.

    There is an interesting example in the article.  China has
opened a consulate in LA.  Another spy expert Mr. James H. Geer
complained, "The opening of the consulate in Los Angeles gives 
them one more platform [to spy]".  

    However, the newspaper report finds that "Unlike the Soviet 
Consulate in San Francisco, which bristles with electronic spy gear.
There are no signs at the Chinese Consulate to indicate that it is
anything other than a visa processing center and diplomatic outpost for
the Chinese government.  In fact, the Chinese consulate, housed in a
building owned by the Plumbers and Pipefitters Pension Fund, is open to
visitors, a dramatic contrast to the tightly guarded Soviet Consulate
in San Francisco,  The Chinese even use the same American janitors who
clean the rest of the building."

    There is no question that the Chinese government, as every other
government on earth, has spy agencies.  However, to be so paranoid 
that any Chinese presence is deemed to be a spy threat, is really
putting all the ethnic Chinese at stake and no way to clean ourselves!

4.  another innuendo -- "grain of sand" story.

    "We have always compared them [the Chinese people, note the racist
tone] to grains of sand," the newspaper quoted.  "If grains of sand
were intelligence targets, the Soviets would surface a submarine in the
dead of night and send a small party to the beach to bring back several
pails of sand.  The Chinese would send 1000 bathers to the broad 
daylight and have each bather bring back one grain of sand."

     Very funny!

 

Section VI:  Truths and Lies about Illegal Exports


    These are a long awaited results.  The documents this study
based on are from the US Department of Commerce and US Department
of Justice compilations of illegal export cases.  Mr. Eftimiades
apparently studies these data and essentially made distortions
on each number he keeps talking about in interviews, and 
consequently quoted in book reviews.  For example in a review 
from Chronical of Education, Mr. Eftimiades was quoted on 
this an apparently absurd number of 50%, which we will get
to more detail.


     It has become a fashion for many people, starting
from the author of the spy book, to quote some numbers in illegal
exports related to China to prove the Chinese spy activities
in the US.  We will just list a few statistics and give a little
explanations of some of the most popular quotations to show
how distortions are made.

1.  50% of the illegal export cases investigated on west coast 
    involves China.

    This statement is not really a lie, but a clever distortion.
People don't pay attention to EVERY words in this statement,
what people pay attention to is this 50%.

Problem with this statement:

a)  These are cases "investigated", not convicted or even prosecuted.
    All "investigated" cases are NOT espionage or even remotely
    illegal cases.  Any business can be "investigated", but most
    of them are found no wrong doings!

    Mr. Eftimiades himself had been "investigated", too, since 
    everyone in the intelligence community needs security clearance!
    It does not make him a spy for Greece!

b)  This statement is originated from a customs official in California
    6 years ago!  The illegal export cases involving China has since
    dropped since 1989 for obvious reasons.

c)  These cases happened in California, where there is a large Chinese
    population and a large concentration of businesses deals with
    China.  So it is not typical nationwide.

d)  Most of these cases involves HK being the end user, which has nothing
    to do with the PRC government that is supposed to spy on the US.  

e)  Many of the companies involved are non-Chinese Americans, while 
    no one has ever accused WHITE Americans for spying for China
    in CBS report and other book interviews!



2.  One in Eight (12%) of the illegal cases listed from the Commerce
Department involves China.

    This is what the CBS VP quoted in his letter.  It is from Mr. Eftimiades.
It is also a distortion.  The problems are similar:

a)  Half of these cases has nothing to do with PRC, they are exporting to
    Hong Kong, such as exporting electronic components to HK for assembly,
    and then probably import back to the US.  They have nothing to do with
    spying. So we left with 6%.

b)  Half of those 6% left are civil cases, which means they are not criminal.
    And non-criminal cases are not espionage cases, everyone knows about that.
    So we have about only 3% left.

    In the CBSVP's words, we have one in thirty cases that may be related
    to China's spying.  It is hardly a "big", not to mention the "biggest"
    network threat.

    This percentage is comparable to illegal export cases with the end
    user being countries that are American allies.

3.  The criminal cases from the Justice Department.  

    The truly reliable number of criminal export cases is from the Justice 
    Department, which compiles the criminal cases prosecuted through DA's 
    office all over the country, including all the cases investigated from 
    the Commence Department, Customs Service, the FBI, etc, in the last 12 
    years.

    This number was quoted in Mr. Eftimiades' book, with the usual distortion
    of including Hong Kong and Taiwan cases into China, therefore creating
    a 6% of all cases.  This is lying!

    The fact is that HK takes 3% of the total,  EXCLUDING those cases when 
    products are exported via Hong Kong to PRC, which are counted as PRC 
    cases, not HK cases.  

    And Mr. Eftimiades or the CBS VP or other reporters don't seem to be
    interested even in this 6%!  Obviously 6% is NOT what they need!

    To list the figures more accurately of all the criminal export cases 
listed in "Significant Export Control Cases, January 1981 to October 1, 1993" 
compiled by the Justice Department:

Iran          21% 
Russia         8% 
South Africa   6%
Libya          6%
England        4% 
P.R. China     3%  (2.9%, or 9 cases out of 309)
HongKong       3%  (Hong Kong 2.6% and Taiwan 0.3%, 8+1 cases)
Switzerland    3%
Iraq           3%
West Germany   2%
Cuba           2%
Japan          2%
Chile          2%
...

    To conclude?  The Britishers have a bigger spy network in the US! 

    [In fact most of illegal export going the England are related to the
IRA, so we can't really blame the Britishers.]

    We see that all these US allies, England, Germany, Japan are all 
having illegal export cases comparable to China.  And Iran and Russia's
illegal export are real "threats" to the US, not those small 3%s.

    Another list, looking at the time span, the cases involving China are

81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
 0  0  1  2  1  1  2  0  0  1  0  1  0

     We can see that the most "active" years are around 83-87. Since then
there is a decrease of illegal export cases involving China, one in two
years in average!  This is because of the cool down of US-China relationship
after June 4th, 1989!



Part Three:  Case Studies
=========================

Section I:  A Canadian TV Case
(From: NLUO@msvax.mssm.edu)

About 15 years ago there was a program on Canadian TV which suggested that
a large number of places at Canadian medical schools were being taken by
Chinese instead of Canadians.  As it turned out, there were very few
Chinese citizens in Canadian medical schools.  The students in question
were mostly Canadians of Chinese ancestry.

Anyway this incident galvanized the Canadian Chinese community leading to
the formation of some organizations that I believe are still active in
defending the rights of people of Chinese ancestry[B.  They
successfully achieved redress for this wrong by the TV network involved
(CTV's program "W5.")

When this occurred I was living in China, but I remember reading an
article about it in a Hong Kong Magazine "The Seventies" (Qishi Niandai)
later re-named "The Nineties" (Jiushi Niandai).  I am sorry that I don't
have the proper reference or access to Chinese magazines here, but the
issue in question came out sometime in the years 1978-81.

I suggest that you might want to make reference to this very past incident
as there may be some useful parallels.




Section II:  An unrelated CBS Lawsuit
(From: zhu@sisko.ecs.umass.edu)
   
   CBS has settled for an undisclosed sum a $10 million lawsuit 
over airing the repossession of a San Francisco man's car on "The 
CBS Evening News", the USA Today reported today.  Herbert Brown had 
sued for invasion of privacy after a CBS crew, with the help of an 
auto repossessor, came into his back yard. He said he was humiliated 
by the segment. No comment from CBS.



Section III:  Marietta Sued In Age Bias Case

(From: zhu@sisko.ecs.umass.edu (Gao-Qiu Zhu))
	
	DENVER (AP) -- Martin Marietta Corp. has targeted older employees
for layoffs, the federal government alleges in an age-discrimination lawsuit.
	The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission alleges 2,200 of
3,500 employees terminated by the company's astronautics group
between 1990 and 1992 were 40 years or older.
	The lawsuit filed Thursday in U.S. District Court contends the
aerospace company ``manipulated work assignments so as to insulate
as many younger employees as possible'' from layoffs.
	It also alleges the company ``promoted ... or condoned an
atmosphere of hostility to older employees'' that caused managers
to believe that they were expected to select older employees
whenever possible for termination.
	Martin Marietta spokesman Evan McCollum said the company's equal
employment opportunity program prohibits age discrimination. ``We
intend to vigorously defend against the suit,'' he said.
	The lawsuit is the largest class-action suit ever filed by the
Denver EEOC office and is one of the largest discrimination actions
taken by the agency nationally, said William Martinez, an EEOC
regional attorney.
	The lawsuit asks for lost wages, damages and potential
reinstatement of employees.
	The lawsuit was filed as the Bethesda, Md.-based Martin Marietta
is thinking of relocating up to 1,800 workers from San Diego to
Colorado. The workers are employed at Atlas, a subsidiary of
General Dynamics Corp., which Martin Marietta purchased.
	Martin Marietta Astronautics Group, which is based in Jefferson
County, west of the Denver area, earlier was named in an
age-discrimination suit filed by 115 former Martin Marietta
workers. A trial is set in January 1996.
 


Section IV:  A Recent Class Action

(From: hua7291@med2s0.engr.ccny.cuny.edu (Mi Mi))

A recent class action case is the Denny's vs. its customers. Denny's
paid $50,000,000. Lawyers had collected several million legal fees.
Any customer then can claim a share of the compensation from the 
$50,000,000. We only want them to pay the legal fee and learn a lesson.
Stop stirfrying illegal/legal Chinese immigrant news!


Section V:  More spy cases

Ji Wang

I was also annoyed by Connie Chung's report about the Chinese spy ring in
the United States, as I was watching the CBS News last week.  It could be
really disturbing if the US Government steps up its efforts to control the
possible damages caused by the Chinese spies, which may create possible
extra burden for us in the future, but this is not the first time that a
national network covered and dealt with such a subject.  I still remember
that since earlier this year, I read reports from both NY Times and
Washington Post about Chinese spies in the US.  In one case, a guy in
Virginia was trying to send night-seeing devices to the Chinese military.
In another case, two Chinese engineers were arrested by police/FBI in a
dispute involving possible illegal acquisition of technology.  And, in the
broader circle, the coverage  of foreign spies burgalarizing US technology
information has intensified in recent years, and the CIA/FBI are helping the
US business to protect themselves from possible espionage.  I still remember
that the news coverage specifically pinpointed France and Germany for this
kind practices.  Also, two or three years ago, Ted Koppel, the Nightline
anchor of ABC, reported that all the gas stations in the US were being
monitored by the KGB systematically.



Section VI:  Connie Chung's programming philosophy

    Dong Xiao reported that Connie Chung has given an interview to a
talk show host Dave Breiner.  During the interview Connie Chung admitted that
the CBS programs are all "rating driven instead of jounalism driven", and she
just "try not to think about it".  

    She offered an explanation that they are "combating tabloid programs".




Section VII:  CBS Liable for Filming Search

Newsgroups: alt.prisons

[Paul Wright, the imprisoned editor of Prison Legal News, sent me the
following and asked me to distribute it widely on the the net because
there has been no coverage of this in the mainstream media.  Typos are
mine.  The article will appear in slightly different form in the next
PLN. PLN is available from P.O. Box 1684, Lake Worth, FL 33460. $12 for
subscriptions and $1 for a sample copy.  Dan Tenenbaum
(dante@microsoft.com)]

CBS Liable for Filming Search

In a landmark decision a federal court in New York has ruled that a CBS
film crew and Secret Service agents are liable for filming and
broadcasting a search of a private citizen's home. It is the first
reported court decision to hold a television broadcaster liable for
accompanying police agents on a search and filming it for the broadcast.
Anyone who has watched "Cops," "Hard Copy," "America's Most Wanted," or
any of the "real life" cop shows has seen the degrading and
propagandistic manner in which the victims of police repression are
portrayed. The broadcasters and the police can be sued and held liable
for such actions.

In 1992 Secret Service agents obtained a search warrant from a federal
court authorizing the search of an apartment shared by Babatunde Ayeni,
his wife Tawa, and small son Kayode, seeking evidence of a credit card
fraud operation. At 6PM on March 5, 1992, several Secret Service (SS)
agents forced their way into the Ayeni residence announcing they had a
warrant to conduct a search and ask questions. Only Mrs. Ayeni and her
son were home at the time. At about 8:15 four more SS agents arrived
with a film crew from the CBS news program "Street Stories." The CBS
film crew was never identified as CBS employees. The CBS crew followed
the SS agents and taped them as they searched the apartment. They took
closeup shots of the home's interior, its closets, personal letters,
family photos, etc. In the apartment's foyer an SS agent was interviewed
about the modus operandi of people who commit credit card frauds and the
tools of their trade. During this tape sequence the SS agent implied the
complicity of the other residence of the Ayeni apartment. No evidence
implicating the Ayenis in any illegal activity was found during the
search. One of the agents was filmed expressing his disappointment.

The Ayenis filed suit against the federal agents as well as CBS,
contending that the search and its filming violated their fourth
amendment right to be free from unreasonable search and seizure. In his
opinion Judge Weinstein agreed with the Ayenis. The defendants sought
qualified immunity, which the court denied.

Under the doctrine of qualified immunity government agents are entitled
to be free from liability for money damages even if they violate
constitutional rights as long as the right is not "well established" so
that a person of reasonable intelligence would know that the right
violated was recognized. In the case the court held that any reasonable
police agent would have known that it is unconstitutional to have
private citizens accompany them on a search to film and broadcast the
search.  The court relied on 18 U.S.C. sec. 3105 which requires that
search warrants be served by an official authorized to serve the warrant
and by no other person unless their assistance is required in conducting
the search, i.e. an accountant, forensic expert, etc., depending on the
nature of the offense being investigated. Thus, the SS agents should
have known that having a film crew taping their activities was illegal. 
Courts have previously held that taking photos is a "seizure" within the
meaning of the fourth amendment. CBS also claimed qualified immunity
from suit. The court notes that private entities are not entitled to
qualified immunity from suit, it only applies to government actors.

The court used harsh language in condemning the actions by the SS and
CBS. "The search warrant was issued to agent Mottola and other agents of
the Unites States Secret Service for precise and limited purposes. It
authorized their entry into the Ayeni's home only to search for items
related to credit card fraud. Agent Mottola's act of facilitating the
CBS camera crew's entry into the apartment and its filming of the search
exceeded the scope of the warrant. It was allegedly in clear violation
then well [sic] established fourth amendment principles.  ..it is the
equivalent of a rogue policeman using his official position to break
into a home in order to steal objects for his own profit or that of
another."

For immunity purposes it would be "...grossly unreasonable for a
government agent not to have known that the presence of private persons
he invited in so that they could titillate and entertain others was
beyond the scope of what was lawfully authorized by the warrant.

"CBS had no greater right than that of a thief to be in the home, to
'capture' the scene of the search on film and to remove the photographic
record. The images, though created by the camera, are a part of the
household; they could not be removed without permission or official
right....The television tape was a seizure of private property,
information, for non-governmental purposes."

It is entirely possible that litigation by the victims of this type of
police and media activity may be able to halt the spread of "police TV."
Findings of liability against both police and the broadcaster will see
to it that police activity is not broadcast to "entertain and
titillate." So if you've been filmed against your will during a police
search you too can sue for an invasion of your privacy and your fourth
amendment rights. The court decision is reported at: Ayeni v. CBS, Inc.,
848 F. Supp 362 (ED NY 1994).



Part Four:  The CBS program and the CBS VP letter analyses
=========================================================

Section I:  An Analysis of the CBS Transcript

By Cao Yulin 

I have read the transcript of CBS Evening News (May 19, 1994, 6:30PM). Here
is my analysis.

(1) How comes a spy?

Mr. Nicholas Eftimiades (NE) (Defense Intelligence Agency):
(Quoted/paraphrased by MS. Connie Chung) "Eftimiades says the prospective
spies are trained, paid and warned to stay in touch."

MS. Connie Chung (CC):
(Said by (CC)) "Every day, planeloads of Chinese citizens arrive legally in
the United States, ordinary people.  But to the Chinese government, some of
them may be future spies, who a few years down the road, will be activated
to steal American's military and technological secrets, whether they want to
or not."

Unidentified Man #1:
"Never forget, you belong to our organization."  (The Ministry of State
Security?) "You were send by our organization."

Unidentified Man #2 and #3:
(Said nothing about this)

ANALYSIS: One can see that all interviewees (including NE) mean that those
who will steal American's military and technological secrets are trained,
paid and send by spy organization.  Therefore, these people, whether they
are sleeper agents or active agents, are spies.  They are not, as CC said,
"ordinary people"! --- though they may look like ordinary people.

Notice the difference between CC and the interviewees:

(a) Interviewees said : trained spies may be send to the US to steal secrets.
    CC said: ordinary people, who entered the US as innocent Chinese, may
    become spies --- no matter they want to or not!

(b) Interviewees said : spies are send by the organization.

    CC said: a Chinese student or businessperson applies for a Visa to go to
    the US by himself, and later is asked by the Ministry of State Security
    to become a spy.

Analysis: CC means Chinese people enter the US without the help of the spy
organization and later become spies!

(c) Interviewees said: spies are trained and paid.
    CC said: the Ministry of State Security just asks ordinary Chinese
    students, scientists and businessperson, who already got visa to the US
    and have nothing to do with agents, some questions, like "What can you
    learn in the State?  Will you be working with computers?  Will you be
    loyal to China?" and most important,  "Can you be patient?"  Then these
    people become spies or "future spies"!

(d) CC said: ordinary Chinese students, scientists and businesspersons, who
    are in the US and have nothing to do with spy, can always be forced to
    be spies just by the Ministry of State Security's threatening:
    "Remember, we'll be watching your family members in China."



Section II:  An Analysis of the CBS Transcript

From cpeng@scripps.edu  Tue Jun  7 13:15:48 1994

About the CBS report:

   I agree with XIAO's comment on the CBS response.
   I like to add some suggestions.

   1.  CBS claims its report on the Chinese spy is objective
       report.  Actually, it is a commentary. It extend
       from one to many, from many to all.  It links 
       illegal business practice to the Chinese Students
       and scientist.   It extend from several isolated
       case to your next door neighbor.
   2.  I talked to some Americans like our supervisors.
       They thought, since soviet is gone.  The CIA will
       find some ground to survive.  So they could create
       some problem.  Since China is still 'communist',
       It is very easy to convince the public that
       China has the largest spy net work.

       Question to ourself:
       Why our Chinese Students and Scholar in the US
       have to be the victim of this result.

   3.  I have also talked to some of the American Chinese.
       Some of them suggest that maybe if Connie Chung
       has no mercy to slander the Chinese community,
       she could make herself be percept more loyal to
       the US government.  Loyal to the US is very good,
       But she does not have to alienate Chinese Americans.
       
       Why Chinese is so easy to become a target?

   4.  There will be more such incident later if our  
       Chinese students and scholars do not stand out
       and make our voice heard.
 
   5.  We love freedom of speech.  Everybody does.
       That is why the new media can say whatever
       it wants to say.   It is protected by the
       constitution.   However, Human rights are
       also protected by the constitution.
       It is perfect illegal to say racial slurs
       everywhere is the US, even KKK can demonstrate
       one the street and say whatever they want.  
       when a news net work can also speak whatever
       nonsense, people can hardly sue it.  However,
       each news net work has its own views (subjective).
       From this CBS incident, we know CBS is biased,
       it is not reluctant to create racial problem,
       or MaCarthyism to the public.  They are doing
       this is because they believe this could attract
       the public attension, after all, they can
       make more money.  
   6.  There are costs for the irresponsible speech.
       Example, A Cartoonist for AT&T made a Cartoon
       for long distance, lines connects to different
       country, in South Africa, a Chimpanzee pickup
       a phone.  (The Cartoonist is not violating any
       law!)   This irritated the black community.
       So finally, AT&T fired that cartoonist.
       This example shows that black American's community
       is very strong.  How about us.
 


Section III:  An Analysis of the CBS VP Response Letter

By HXYUE@WSUHUB.UC.TWSU.EDU

Just some thoughts:

1. Because it is CBS who made the harmful news, so we should make CBS
   as a direct target, not anyone else.  If CBS thinks they were misleaded
   by other information sources, they could sue those sources.

2. It is the first case that caught so many CCS' attention and made the
   strongest reactions in recent years.  So it might be the last chance
   we could win.  Why?  Our strong reactions have sent a warning to the
   public.  Next time, if somebody wants to spit on us, they will make it
   more "elegant" and hard to be punched.  So we should try our best this
   time.

3. The CBS response letter is nothing new except making some conflict with
   the original CBS evening news (see below).  They said the evening news was
   based on two information sources:  United States Defense Information Agency
   and U.S.  Commerce Department.  It seems they recognize some potential
   problems in this piece of news and want to distance themselves from it.
   No way!

[The VP letter is ommitted here ...]

The scope of "hundreds" is much less than "Every day, planeloads of
Chinese citizens......ordinary people......" or "......the people you could
find in the house next door......"

Who sell them to China?  Some US companies just want to make more money
and ignor the export restraction law.  This kind of incidents have been shown
on news medias many times.  China is not their only "black market".  These
companies are also considered as spies.  Are you talking about these spy
cases?



Section IV:  Unprofessionalism in the CBS Report

By Dong Xiao

    What's condidered professional journalism?  Balanced views.  I was 
reading an article about Chinese espionage threat in California, it has
presented the FBI's opinions, which is quite paranoid when facts are
presented.  And it also quoted Chinese officials, denying there are espinoage
activities from China.  Although the denial is expected, it is for the reader
to make a judgement.  And it also quoted leaders from Chinese American
community.  So the reader can form his or her own opinion about the facts.

    Anyother example, an article from New York Daily News that was about
this CBS report.  The journalist presented both sides, what the story is
about, the Chinese community's reactions and Connie Chung's explanations.

    In the CBS report, however, it is only a one man (and one woman) show.
The rest are all anonymous dramatizers.  It is utterly unprofessional
as a news report!

    However, it is not illegal.  In fact the Congress had regulations 
regarding balance views in broadcasting.  It was either expired or overturned
a few years ago, and the Congress was unable to write a new law.  That
is why we have so many one sided talk shows infesting the broadcasting
stations, such as Rush Limbaugh and G. Gordon Liddy shows, which I happened 
to enjoy a lot.  :-)  It's like enjoying reading certain individual's 
persistent and paranoid articles on soc.culture.china.

   Even so, unlike opinion oriented talk shows, a professional piece of 
news report should still present all sides of the story.


By Liang Er

Mr. Lin Chong-Ping, whom I met in many conferences the last of which was on
Symposium on Deng's Death in D.C. Dec. 1993, has called me on Wednesday
morning, and both of us have discussed the CBS report for about 20 minutes.
As he said, C.Chung, as a prefessional of press, should have made two
things clear in the very beginning of her program in order to achieve
professional level:

First, acknowledge that the percentage of the Chinese spies based upon the
large number of Chinese in the U.S. is ver small, though the absolute
number is somehow large. 

Second, acknowledge that China is only one of the countries which have
many intellegence operation in the U.S.. 

Hence, his comment on Chung's report is that she didn't do it very
prefessionally, and her report can be easily consider as opinions with
anti-Asian emotions, and be used for anti-Asian people. 



Appendix I:   Spy Book Review by the Chronical of Higher Education
==================================================================

Dispatch Case(The Chronicle of Higher Education, May 25, 1994, A37)

A new book on intelligent gathering by the People's  Republic  of
China  maintains  that  many of the students the country sends to
the United States are part of its vast network of spies.

The Book, Chinese Intelligence Operations(Naval Institute Press),
was   written   by   Nicholas  Efitimiades,  an  analyst  in  the
espionage-damage-assessment branch of  the  Defense  Intelligence
Agency.   The  author  says his book does not necessarily reflect
the views of the Department of Defense or the U.S. government.

"To collect information, the Ministry of State  Security  co-opts
vast  numbers  of Chinese citizens living or traveling overseas,"
he says.  "Most Chinese clandestine collection activities are not
sophisticated  operations,  but their numbers compensate for this
weakness."

According Mr. Efitimiades, the focus of much of the spying is  on
technology, specifically mid-level technology not cleared for ex-
port.  About half of the 900 cases of illegal technology transfer
investigated  by  U.  S.  authorities each year on the West Coast
alone involve the Chinese, he says.

Mr. Efitimiades also discuss how China's security apparatus tries
to  infiltrate  dissidents groups, at home and abroad, and how it
tries to recruit visiting academics, among others, for  espionage
and  other  opinion-molding  activities.  "For the most part, re-
cruitment methods tend to be crude by the  standards  of  Western
intelligence," he says.

********************

James V. Feinerman, director of the Committee on  Scholarly  Com-
munication  with China, said in an interview in last week that he
had heard allegations of such Chinese spying before, but also had
"never  heard  of  a  really authenticated case." His Washington-
based committee  is  affiliated  with  the  American  Council  of
Learned  Societies, the National Society of Sciences, and the So-
cial Science Research Council.

"Even among Chinese students and scholars in the U.S., there  was
suspicion,  more  pronounced before June 4, that every campus had
its informer or informers," he said.  June 4 was the date of  the
Tiananmen massacre five years ago.

Mr. Feinerman, who was not familiar with Mr. Efitimiades's  book,
said he was not aware of any cases of American academics in China
being pressured to spy.

"We have, however, had the reverse problem, where people there to
conduct legitimate intellectual research have been accused by the
Chinese" of spying for the United States, he said.

Mr. Feinerman said he doubted the existence of a massive  web  of
Chinese  student spies.  "If was such a widespread problem, there
would be more discussion of it," he said, "especially  with  such
an  enormous group of dissident Chinese students and scholars now
in the United States."


Appendix II:  Review of the spy book by the Associated Press
============================================================

        WASHINGTON (AP) -- China spies on the United States more
aggressively than does any other nation, and U.S. counterespionage
agencies are ill-prepared to cope with it, according to a new book
by a Defense Intelligence Agency officer.
        Nick Eftimiades, a China specialist and counterintelligence
analyst at the DIA, blames an ``unseen, unspoken'' but real and
deliberate reluctance among U.S. political leaders in recent years
to get tough with China on espionage.
        ``People don't want to bang on China,'' he said in an interview
this week.
        In his book, ``Chinese Intelligence Operations,'' Eftimiades
specifically cited the Bush administration's efforts to improve
political relations with Beijing as an ``impediment to effective
action against'' China's espionage.
        Robert Gates, director of the CIA during the Bush
administration, said in an interview it was nonsense to suggest
that counterspy efforts were hurt by President Bush's overtures to
Beijing. But he agreed that China's spying activities have
``probably stepped up'' and ``become more sophisticated.''
        The book's publication comes at a politically sensitive time in
U.S.-Chinese relations, as President Clinton prepares to decide by
next week whether to revoke most-favored nation trade privileges as
punishment for Beijing's reported human rights abuses.
        Eftimiades stressed that his book was not meant as a call to
arms against a threat to Western democracy; indeed, he notes that
China's intelligence operations historically have suffered from
sloppiness, poor planning and weak execution. Even so, he says, the
sheer volume of operations ensures some will succeed.
        ``There is no question that their espionage activities are more
pervasive than what we have seen from any other country,''
Eftimiades said in the interview.
        Yet when people think of foreign spying in the United States
they think of Soviet ``moles'' such as Aldrich Ames, a CIA officer
who pleaded guilty last month to selling state secrets to Moscow
for nine years and was sentenced to life in prison.
        They don't think of Larry Chin Wu-tai. He was a CIA analyst who
passed national secrets to Beijing for 35 years before retiring in
1981. Four years after retirement, Chin was indicted on spying
charges and was later convicted.
        Eftimiades has spent 10 years in the intelligence business,
first at the CIA and the State Department and now at DIA, where he
helps assess damage caused by spying against America, including the
Ames case.
        It is unusual for an active U.S. intelligence official to write
a book on spying, and Eftimiades' experience in getting his
published shows some of the reasons why.
        The least of his problems was having the manuscript reviewed by
the government to ensure no secrets were disclosed. The real
trouble came from fellow DIA workers, some of whom were angered
that he did not share with DIA his interviews with Chinese
intelligence officers.
        While some DIA officials protested to his superiors, Eftimiades
said, the agency never challenged his right to publish the book,
which he researched and wrote on his own time.
        He says the American government, including its
counterintelligence agencies, practically ignored China's spying
during the Cold War because the Soviet Union was seen as a more
dangerous and immediate threat.
        Yet even now, after the demise of the Soviet empire, Washington
pays relatively little attention to China's aggressive espionage
and is sorely lacking in the linguistic and other skills required
to combat it, Eftimiades says.
        ``The United States and other Western industrialized nations are
woefully unprepared'' to counteract China's spying, Eftimiades
wrote.
        Vincent Cannistraro, a former CIA officer who was director of
intelligence programs at the National Security Council in 1984-87,
said in an interview that he agreed U.S. capabilities to neutralize
Chinese spying were lacking at a time when Beijing is ``engaged in
espionage against us in a serious way.''
        China's intelligence apparatus draws on the services of not only
the 11,500 diplomats, trade representatives and other Chinese
visitors here, but also the 15,000 Chinese students who arrive on
U.S. campuses each year and hundreds of thousands of Chinese
Americans around the country, Eftimiades wrote.
        One of China's favorite methods is to ``plant'' long-term agents
in the United States who are trained to remain inactive for 10
years or more, until they have sunk deep roots into a U.S.
corporation, institution or government agency. These are known in
Chinese spy agency slang as ``fish at the bottom of the ocean.''
        Eftimiades said China's top intelligence-gathering priorities in
the United States are advanced U.S. technology for military use;
identifying foreign policy trends, including trade; and
counteracting Chinese dissident groups.
        The FBI, which has primary responsibility for
counterintelligence within U.S. borders, the CIA and the Chinese
Embassy declined to comment on the book.



Appendix III:  Review of the spy book by Agence France Presse
=============================================================

China's Spy Activity in U.S. "Most Pervasive" 

Source: Agence France Presse English Wire, 24/5/1994

China has developed the most pervasive spy network in the United States,
drawing on tens of thousands of Chinese diplomats, students and visitors,
according to a new book written by a US intelligence officer.

The book, unusual in that it was written by an active intelligence official,
said US agencies were ill-equipped to deal with Chinese spying, having
devoted much of their resources to Russia and the former Soviet Union.

"The United States and other Western industrialized nations are woefully
unprepared" for dealing with Chinese espionage, said the book by Nick
Eftimiades, a China specialist with the Defense Intelligence Agency.

"There is no question that (China's) espionage activities are more pervasive
than what we have seen from any other country," he said in the book.

Eftimiades, whose manuscript was reviewed by the government to ensure that
no secrets were revealed, said a favorite technique of China is to plant
agents in the United States for 10 years or more before using them for
intelligence-gathering. These spies are known as "fish at the bottom of the
ocean."

The book says Chinese intelligence uses the 11,500 diplomats as well as the
15,000 Chinese students who arrive in the United States each year and
hundreds of thousands of Chinese-Americans.

The Chinese are especially interested in US military technology, trade and
foreign policy trends and counteracting dissident groups in China.

The book "Chinese Intelligence Operations," said China took advantage of the
policy of greater US openness to China by former president George Bush to
step up intelligence in the United States.

Eftimiades said US counterintelligence lacks the linguistic skills and other
resources needed to combat Chinese spying, which was virtually ignored
during the Cold War. He also maintained that Chinese intelligence suffers
from sloppiness and poor organization, but said some of the shortcomings are
compensated by sheer volume.


xiao@scri.fsu.edu