The Pharisees, angry at Jesus’ criticism of them and jealous of the crowds that followed him, sent clever men out to question Jesus while he was speaking in the hope of tripping him up. But he confounded them time and again, as when they asked him if it was lawful to pay taxes to the hated Romans, and he replied: “Give to Caesar what is Caesar’s, but give to God what is God’s.” Or when they asked if a woman caught in adultery should be stoned to death, and Christ said: “Let the man among you who has no sin be the first to cast a stone at her.”

But Christians throughout the world believe that Jesus was more than just a good and holy man; they believe that he was the Son of God, the Messiah promised in the Old Testament. As evidence of their belief, Christians cite the fulfillments in Jesus of Old Testament prophecies regarding the place and circumstances of the Messiah’s birth, the betrayal and suffering he endured, and the manner of his death.

But the most convincing evidence of Jesus’ claim to be God was the spectacular miracles he performed before hundreds and even thousands of eyewitnesses (“These very works which I perform testify on my behalf that the Father has sent me.”). He changed water into wine; cured the blind, deaf and lame; exorcised demons from people; fed thousands with only a few loaves of bread and fishes; and raised three people from the dead, including his friend Lazarus.

The raising of Lazarus four days after he had died was the last straw as far as the chief priests and Pharisees were concerned and they wove a plot to kill Jesus, getting unexpected help from one of Christ’s own disciples, Judas, who was willing to betray his master for 30 pieces of silver. Jesus was arrested late at night, put through the mockery of a trial, beaten and tortured, and then put to death on the orders of Pontius Pilate.

The followers of Jesus thought they had seen the last of him when his body was taken down from the cross and placed in a borrowed grave outside Jerusalem nearly 2,000 years ago. But, three days later, the tomb was found to be empty and more than a dozen people reported having seen Jesus alive that Sunday. Over the next 40 days, Jesus was seen in different places at different times by small groups of people and by large groups, including a crowd of 500. On the 40th day, according to reliable eyewitness accounts, he gave his disciples their final instructions, to carry his teachings “to the ends of the earth,” and then rose up into the heavens, not to return until the end of the world.

Whatever attitude people hold toward Jesus Christ, whether they believe him to be God or not, there is no question that if his teachings were followed faithfully by everyone, the world would be a better and more peaceful place to live.

People’s Liberation Army’s CAO
by William Triplett

Next week, the White House Staff has to make a decision: Is there any political risk in having your boss’ picture taken with the Communist Chinese military officer most associated with the proliferation of nuclear, chemical, biological and missile proliferation to terrorist countries over the past 20 years?

PLA Gen. Cao Gangchuan, Communist China’s defense minister, will be visiting the United States beginning tomorrow. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld has to see him; He’s the official host. But the real question everyone wants answered is whether Gen. Cao is going to make the Oval Office. Beijing and its Washington collaborators are making a big push for Gen. Cao to see President Bush. There is precedent here, they argue, because President Clinton had invited the last Chinese defense minister to the White House even though that one had been in operational control of the PLA forces who killed so many Chinese young people at Tiananmen Square.

Gen. Cao is the PLA’s weapons guy. He buys them, he makes them and he sells them. On the weapons selling side, he began as a staffer in the late 1970s, worked his way up to deputy division chief, division chief and then chief of the PLA’s notorious “Office of Military Trade” by the early 1990s. From then on, with patronage from the Deng family, his career took off and under one title or another he has been the PLA’s leading weapons official ever since.

Let’s look at the record of Gen. Cao’s arms-smuggling exploits:

• In the 1980s, PLA companies were busy selling Silkworm missiles to Iran.

• In 1990, a Chinese arms company was caught busting the U.N. arms embargo on Iraq by smuggling rocket fuel.

• In January 1990, the Chinese and Iran signed a 10-year “military technology transfer agreement.”

• In 1990, Sen. Joseph Biden, Delaware Democrat, pressed the State Department to explain PLA assistance to the Libyan chemical weapons complex.

• In 1991, British Intelligence discovered the Chinese were secretly building a nuclear weapons plant in Algeria.

• In 1992, CIA Director Robert Gates told Congress Syria was seeking chemical and biological warheads from China.

• In 1993, CIA Director James Woolsey named Chinese military companies as the leading poison gas suppliers to Iran.

• In 1994, German intelligence stopped another sanctions-busting Chinese rocket fuel export bound for Iraq.

• In 1994, the Wall Street Journal reported that America’s Defense Intelligence Agency found Communist China was secretly assisting North Korea’s long-range missile programs.

• In 1995, Defense News quoted from a CIA report detailing the PLA’s extensive efforts to give Iran an indigenous missile capability.

• In 1995, South Korean intelligence reported China’s Commission on Science and Technology for National Defense (COSTIND) was training hundreds of North Korean missile engineers.

• In 1996, China signed a $4.6 billion arms deal with Iran.

• In 1997, German intelligence reported Chinese military companies were building a major poison gas plant in Iran.

• In 1997, Secretary of State Madeleine Albright pressed Beijing twice on Chinese arms sales to Libya that were in contravention to the U.N. sanctions.

• In 1997, Mrs. Albright revealed that Chinese military companies had transferred germ warfare-making equipment to Iran.

• In 1999, ABC News reported Syria was receiving Chinese medium-range, mobile-launch missile technology.

These are just representative samples. A true account, just from unclassified materials, would be book-length. In 1996, the CIA told the Congress that Communist China was the world’s leading proliferator of Weapons of Mass Destruction, and so it remains. Since President George Bush took office in January 2001, the U.S. Government has sanctioned Gen. Cao’s arms companies about 40 times for serious WMD and missile smuggling to terrorist countries.

Just last month, the State Department dropped the Helms Amendment (named for former Sen. Jesse Helms) on Communist China’s leading arms company for repeatedly smuggling missile parts to Iran. Beijing’s Foreign Ministry is screaming that will cost them billions of dollars in U.S. sales.

During all this time, Gen. Cao has been at “Ground Zero” on Chinese proliferation. He has done more than any other Chinese official, military or civilian, to make the world a more dangerous place. If he had a nickname, it would truly be “general Proliferation.”

Foreign defense ministers come and go in Washington almost every week. None of the defense ministers from Asia have rated an individual meeting with President Bush in the Oval Office. This includes Japan, South Korea, the Philippines or Thailand, where we have formal military alliances of longstanding. It would certainly send the wrong message for Gen. Cao to be welcomed to the White House when our closest friends and supporters have not.

It is said that if you must sup with the devil, do so with a long spoon.

—The Washington Times, October 24, 2003, p.A21

Communism’s New People’s Army
by Arnoud de Borchgrave

New People’s Army rebels attacked government forces 335 times in the first nine months of this year, making the Marxist-led movement a greater threat in the eyes of Philippine intelligence chiefs than al Qaeda and its local allies.

Police have suffered 72 killed and 380 wounded during that period while the army is averaging one soldier killed every day by the resurgent NPA.

Targets have ranged from communications sites to police stations and local mayoral offices, National Security Adviser Roilo Golez said in an interview. The rebels have also destroyed scores of construction and agricultural machines and equipment.

The NPA gets political support from eight members of Congress, who are split among three neo-Marxist political parties.

Speaker of the House Jose de Venecia said in an interview that he believes he has persuaded the eight pro-NPA members not to walk out or shout insults as they had planned to do during President Bush’s speech to a joint session of Congress tomorrow.

Mr. de Venecia also was optimistic that recent peace talks with NPA leader Jose Maria Sison in Norway will produce results within six to nine months. But veteran military and intelligence chiefs are much less hopeful about the on-and-off peace talks, which have been under way for several years.

Mr. Sison, 60 and charismatic, lives in the Netherlands with his Dutch wife.

The NPA is the world’s oldest guerrilla group, having started out fighting the Japanese occupation during World War II. Since 1965, its orientation has been Maoist.

Philippine officials say the NPA’s 11,000 guerrillas are present

in about 70 percent of the country, a vast archipelago spanning 7,000 islands. It uses encrypted e-mail, satellite phones, and other sophisticated equipment, almost all of it stolen from army and police forces.

Military intelligence estimates that the group takes in $30 million a year from gold mining at Davao in Mindanao. It also collects clandestine levies from gambling casinos and protection for narcotics traffickers.

Powerful Chinese Filipinos control the drug trade and they, in turn, are protected by corrupt congressmen, say intelligence officers who spoke not for attribution. One congressman has been indicted for 11 murders. His chief defense attorney is a former chief justice of the Supreme Court.

“Police, judges, journalists, both print and TV, are on the take,” said one antidrug specialist.

Another such specialist said President Gloria Macapagal Arroyo “is acutely aware of the dangers. That is why some totally corrupt politicians are closing ranks to block her bid for [re-election] next May.”

An abortive military coup on July 27 was far more extensive than first reported and probably would have succeeded had it not been penetrated from its formative stage. It was inspired by what junior officers had been reading in press reports about scandalous behavior by leading politicians. The government waited until the coup, led by a mid-level officer, was under way in downtown Manila before acting to block the seizure of a television station and taking other steps.

The Philippine air force is now down to two ancient F-5 fighter bombers. A third one crashed recently. Officers explain that since the United States was asked to evacuate Subic Bay Naval Station and Clark Air Base, the Philippine armed forces have been left to their own devices and the country’s meager resources. Mrs. Arroyo’s commitment to the U.S.-led war on terrorism has eased the situation somewhat. A handful of Black Hawk and Huey helicopters have been pledged.

—The Washington Times, October 17, 2003, p. A17

Communism’s Voice: Walter Duranty
by Sara Kugler

A 1932 Pulitzer Prize awarded to the New York Times should be revoked, says a historian assigned by the newspaper to review the winning work, which has been questioned for years.

A subcommittee of the Pulitzer Board has reviewed the awarding of the prize won in 1932 by Walter Duranty for his series on the Soviet Union. The review was sparked by complaints that Mr. Duranty deliberately ignored, in later coverage, the forced terror famine in the Ukraine that killed millions of people.

Mark von Hagen, a Columbia University history professor, said in his report to the New York Times that Mr. Duranty “frequently writes in the enthusiastically propagandistic language of his sources” and that “there is a serious lack of balance in his writing.”

“For the sake of the New York Times’ honor, they should take the prize away,” Mr. von Hagen said in an interview yesterday with the Associated Press. The New York Sun first reported the professor’s recommendation.

The Times has reviewed Mr. von Hagen’s report and forwarded it to the Pulitzer Board with a recommendation from Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., who declined to comment yesterday. “It was between me and the Pulitzer Board,” he said. The next step “is a decision for the Pulitzer committee.”

This was not the first time the Pulitzer Board has reconsidered its award to Mr. Duranty, who died in 1957. A similar review in 1990 ended with a decision to let the Pulitzer stand. Mr. Duranty covered the Soviet Union for the New York Times from 1922 to 1941, earning acclaim for an exclusive 1929 interview with the Soviet dictator Josef Stalin.

But Mr. Duranty eventually was criticized for reporting the communist line, rather than the facts. According to the 1990 book “Stalin’s Apologist,” by Sally J. Taylor, Mr. Duranty knew of the famine but ignored the atrocities to preserve his access to Stalin. The famine came in 1933, a year after Mr. Duranty won his Pulitzer.

Mr. von Hagen’s report said Mr. Duranty, as a reporter, “fell under Stalin’s spell.”

“Much of the ‘factual’ material is dull and largely uncritical recitation of Soviet sources, whereas his efforts at ‘analysis’ are very effective renditions of the Stalinist leadership’s self-understanding of their murderous and progressive project to defeat the backwardness of Slavic, Asiatic peasant Russia,”

Mr. von Hagen writes.

The Times has also distanced itself from Mr. Duranty’s work. The reporter’s 1932 Pulitzer is displayed with the notation: “Other writers in the Times and elsewhere have discredited this coverage.”

Mr. von Hagen said the Times asked him in July to review the Duranty work. He submitted a report to the newspaper about a month later. Sig Gissler, administrator of the Pulitzer Prizes, declined to comment on Mr. von Hagen’s report. No Pulitzer has been revoked since the prizes were first awarded in 1917, although The Washington Post voluntarily returned a Pulitzer awarded two decades ago to Janet Cook for a fictitious account of a child drug addict.

“This is a matter under internal review,” Mr. Gissler said, when the subcommittee would end its probe, but said the ultimate decision would come from the entire board. The Pulitzer Board meets twice a year, in November and April.

Members of the Ukrainian Congress Committee of America joined Ukrainians worldwide this year in urging the withdrawal of Mr. Duranty’s award in a campaign that included more than 15,000 postcards and thousands more letters and e-mails sent to the Pulitzer Board.

The effort was timed to coincide with the 70th anniversary of the 1932-33 terror famine, which claimed at least 7 million Ukrainian lives. Some scholars say the figure is closer to 10 million. Stalin’s regime created the famine to force Ukrainian peasants into surrendering their land. He sought to use systematic starvation as a means of breaking Ukrainian resistance to his iron-fisted rule.

—The Washington Times, October 23, 2003, p.1

Last year, 18,000 Russians joined the Communist Party—best known, of course, for ruling the Soviet Union with an iron fist for 70 years—and 80% of those new members were under 40. (Nationwide, 500,000 Russians identify themselves as Communists.) The party is starting to make a comeback, largely because young Russians see it as a way to protest current conditions: The economy collapsed in 1998, and many people are struggling. Ironically, when asked, many new members admit that they don’t like the Communists, but they dislike Putin and company even more. Some young voters say that only the Communists can shake up a moribund Russia, and the party is working to recruit them by sponsoring rock concerts, revitalizing youth movements and noting that everyone had a job in the old Soviet Union.

—Parade Magazine, October 5, 2003, p.16

Walter Duranty, Herbert Matthews and The New York Times
by Lowell Ponte

“As someone who spent time in the Soviet Union while it still existed,” said New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller in a recent interview, “the notion of airbrushing history kind of gives me the creeps.”

This is what the character Winston Smith did in George Orwell’s dystopian novel 1984 – the re-writing of official history so that Big Brother would always appear omniscient, wise and correct.

But Keller was not arguing for truth. He was not, e.g., objecting to the November CBS miniseries the script of which dishonestly depicts former President Ronald Reagan as a demented homophobic madman who in private declares himself to be the AntiChrist.

No, Bill Keller was voicing his distaste for those who demand that the New York Times return, or at least repudiate, the Pulitzer Prize awarded in 1932 to its Soviet Union correspondent Walter Duranty.

Duranty either through an inability to find facts or, more likely, for Leftist ideological motives deliberately dismissed rumors that Soviet dictator Josef Stalin was systematically starving uncooperative farmers in the Ukraine. Today we know from the Soviet Union’s own records and other sources that Stalin thus murdered as many as 17 million people.

To confront this controversy, the Times hired Columbia University History Professor Mark von Hagen, an expert on early 20th Century Russian history. Duranty’s reporting, von Hagen concluded, exhibited a “lack of balance and uncritical acceptance of the Soviet self-justification for its cruel and wasteful regime [that] was a disservice to the American readers of The New York Times.”

“For the sake of The New York Times’ honor, they should take the prize away,” said this newspaper’s own expert Dr. von Hagen.

But in his letter about this to the Pulitzer board, Times Publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., put forth arguments against rescinding Duranty’s prize. Doing so, he wrote, would resemble the “Stalinist practice to airbrush purged figures out of official records and histories.”

These words of his boss are what Keller was parroting, despite his own admission that Duranty’s reporting was “dreadful, a parroting of propaganda.”

So what, if we parse or in the postmodern word “deconstruct” these statements, are the Publisher and Executive Editor of America’s “newspaper of record” really saying? It is apparent that New York Times correspondent Walter Duranty wrote falsehoods. By publishing his reports, the New York Times amplified these Stalinist falsehoods and gave them credibility.

Whether Duranty wrote as an ideological Leftist or merely as a lapdog who got favored treatment in the Soviet Union by writing articles friendly to Stalin’s regime, the effect was to turn the New York Times into a megaphone for Marxist propaganda.

But rather than apologize for publishing pro-Stalinist propaganda and take steps to discredit and disown it, Sulzberger and Keller have made the surrealistic argument that to exorcise this bloody ghost haunting their house and tainting the honor of the Pulitzer Prize would itself be a Stalinistic act of historical revisionism. To correct a lie with the truth would itself be a lie. To right a wrong is to commit a wrong.

This sick Leftist mindset able to see up as down, white as black, peace as war and freedom as slavery is what George Orwell in 1984 called “DoubleThink.” Nowadays no knowledgeable person doubts that the New York Times is a very Orwellian newspaper.

Why is the New York Times so reluctant to acknowledge the pro-Communist reporting of one of its correspondents? My suspicion is that to remove Duranty’s skeleton from the consecrated burial ground of honest journalism would disturb and reveal other red skeletons.

As the old joke goes, does the name “Pavlov” ring a bell? How about the name Herbert Matthews? This was the New York Times correspondent who in 1959 sent back glowing reports from Cuba reassuring America that the rebel in the hills, Fidel Castro, was not a Communist. Fidel, reported Matthews again and again, was just an “agrarian reformer,” freedom fighter and noble idealist.

Castro, of course, was a Communist who turned Cuba into a Marxist dictatorship and colony of the Soviet Union. Democratic President John F. Kennedy agreed not to overthrow Castro in exchange for no Soviet missiles stationed on Cuban soil – a pledge the Soviets technically kept. Moscow kept this pledge by providing Castro with

nuclear-capable MiG-23 aircraft and by docking Soviet submarines at Cienfuegos, where their nuclear missiles could be zeroed in on U.S. cities with the same targeting accuracy as land-based missiles.

It later would turn out that Herbert Matthews himself was a member of as many as 12 “Communist Front” organizations, a far-Left political orientation not unusual among Times reporters.)

The grim joke William F. Buckley, Jr., made of this was that Fidel could boast, like so many others, that “I got my job through the New York Times.”

In February 2001, the year of his 75th birthday, the world’s longest-surviving dictator, Fidel Castro, entertained Hollywood guests in Havana. The CEO of MTV Tom Freston was there, as perhaps to kiss Fidel’s ring was Vanity Fair editor Graydon Carter as well as the head of the William Morris talent agency Jim Wiatt. One of the attendees described this tropical prison with 11 million inmate slaves as “the most romantic, soulful and sexy country I’ve ever been to in my life.”

The other superstar at Fidel’s intimate gathering was Les Moonves, the President and CEO of CBS Television, a division of Viacom (and its controlling Viacommies). This is the man who greenlighted “The Reagans,” with its vile revisionist depiction of the great President now dying of Alzheimer’s Disease, due to air in November 2003. Playing Ronald Reagan in this propagandistic smear is the husband of hyperLeftist Barbra Streisand, James Brolin.

Moonves returned from Havana clutching a cigar box signed by Fidel with the same hand that has murdered tens of thousands of people. Moonves seemed both comfortable and proud to have shared intimacies with a Marxist dictator who not only violates all other human rights but is also notorious for systematically imprisoning, torturing and executing gays just because he dislikes homosexuality.

CBS, lest we forget, is also known as the Clinton BS network. The Executive Producer of “60 Minutes” on CBS, Don Hewitt, has boasted that he personally elected Bill Clinton with that entirely phony interview aired just after the 1992 Superbowl.

Viewers of this interview were never told that Bill and Hillary were given the questions they would be asked prior to this interview, or that they were given control of the “final cut” – i.e., that they could re-take anything they said until they were satisfied with it. In the end, the videotaped interview that aired was, in effect, a free $20+ million campaign ad for the Clintons shaped exactly to their specifications.

Moonves is also a huge Democratic Party supporter and Clinton acolyte. He sat in the place of honor next to Hillary Clinton at the 2000 Democratic National Convention.

CBS Evening News is home to anchorman Dan Rather, who nearly wore his tongue down to a stub from licking Hillary Clinton’s shoes so hard in what must be the most sycophantic interview ever done on network television. This column has done its own proposed interview with Dan Rather, but he has never taken me up on the offer. Rather, appropriately enough, was born on Halloween Day, 1931. Happy 72nd birthday, Dan.

Or should I paraphrase the way Dan Rather once ended an interview of his own with Fidel Castro, waving in supplication as the Marxist dictator’s limousine sped off and calling out: “Goodbye, Mr. President, take care!”

Rather has never been this friendly with any Republican. “Goodbye, Mr. Anchorman, take care!”

The good news is that people need no longer depend on Leftists such as Dan Rather or the reporters of the New York Times as their sole source of news and information. Internet sources such as FrontPageMagazine.com, talk radio, and television alternatives such as the FoxNewsChannel have punched huge holes in what once was an iron curtain media monopoly keeping truth out. Light now floods through those holes.

The fading Leftist media now feels the heat, and sometimes sees the light, when it tries to repeat its old time lies. Nowadays when a fine writer such as Peggy Noonan calls for boycotting sponsors of the upcoming CBS smear against Ronald Reagan, sponsors listen. Lefty Les Moonves now says that statements in this miniseries that “go too far” might be cut out in the final edit.

Attempts to rebuild the Leftist media monolith are also falling short. America breathed a sigh of relief days ago at the news that New York Times Chairman Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr.’s offer to buy the Wall Street Journal (and, we can infer, soon thereafter shut down its pro-capitalist editorial pages, which you can read seven days a week at OpinionJournal.com) was refused.

Nearly half the public, a recent Gallup Poll confirms, continues to see the establishment media as “too liberal” (while only 14 percent see it as “too conservative”), and therefore the public ought to distrust the news and entertainment images this biased media delivers. Given how it has been awarded through backstage rigging in the past, the Pulitzer Prize itself is a tainted honor worthy of only limited respect.

Former Vice President and aspiring media mogul Al Gore has reportedly been told by advertising executives that if his new network is identified as “liberal” in the public perception, it will be “dead on arrival” as a commercial entity.

Fox News, by contrast, has succeeded overwhelmingly by including the balance long missing from establishment Leftist media. But with the forthcoming move by its Sunday anchor Tony Snow to the new Fox talk radio network, the newly named anchor of “Fox News Sunday” is Chris Wallace, son of CBS “60 Minutes” star Mike Wallace, a veteran of the established networks.

As reported by Howard Kurtz in the October 28th Washington Post, Fox News Chairman Roger Ailes “said the hiring of Wallace ‘makes it more difficult for our critics’ who say the network tilts to the right. ‘They want to pigeonhole us into something that their imagination tells them,’ Ailes said.”

A cynic might be tempted to believe that Leftist criticism of Fox, at least in some small measure, has therefore been successful in this hiring of a moderate. For his part, veteran Emmy-winning reporter Chris Wallace, 56, comes like Brit Hume

before him from ABC.

For critics [e.g., James Wolcott of, you guessed it, Vanity Fair] to call Fox a right-wing network, says Wallace, is “an unfair rap. Its reporting is serious, thoughtful and evenhanded…. If they wanted someone to push a political agenda, they wouldn’t have hired me.”

Getting access to the whole truth requires not only diversity of sources but also an ever-expanding frontier of new media. This coming week, as Stephen Moore of the Club For Growth and Cato Institute explains, the Federal Communications Commission can expand or contract the horizon for the future of internet television. We need these channels of communication. They could become yet more holes in the iron curtain through which the un-airbrushed light of whole truth can shine.

—FrontPageMagazine.com, October 31, 2003

A recent Pentagon report indicates that the Chinese assault on the U.S. Energy Department’s national laboratories is continuing. The victim this time appears to be the Ames Laboratory, located on the campus of Iowa State University.

Ames is one of the Energy Department’s “science” labs. It focuses primarily on energy-related research in the materials, chemical and biological sciences. But it also conducts research on behalf of national security clients.

This time around, the Chinese have acquired a so-called “smart material” known as Terfenol-D. Terfenol-D was originally developed by the Ames Lab in the 1970s under contract to the U.S. Navy. The Pentagon report said that the material is used in “militarily critical naval and aerospace applications.”

Bill Gertz, writing in the Washington Times, reported that the Navy uses the material in advanced sonar systems for tracking enemy submarines. U.S. officials told him that the Chinese could use the material to develop multiple-warhead ballistic missiles as part of their overall strategic nuclear force modernization. Gertz said that sales of the material are strictly controlled and require an export license.

The FBI has alleged that two Chinese students stole information about the material in a “computer hacking incident.” One of the students attended Iowa State University and was said to have worked closely with the Ames Lab. One of the two students admitted supplying the Chinese military with the Terfenol-D data.

Over the years, the U.S. Navy has spent millions of dollars in

research to create the smart material. In 2003, Congress appropriated over $5 million for continued research on the material.

The FBI cites this as a good example of how the Chinese are acquiring dual-use military technologies in the United States. In an interview with the Associated Press, a senior FBI official charged that many of the thousands of Chinese visitors, students and businessmen come to the United States each year with tasking from Beijing to collect intelligence information.

The Pentagon report labeled academic exchanges as one of the prime methods the Chinese use to collect sensitive technologies, like Terfenol-D. The report also said the authoritative Chinese journals have recommended an increase in the use of overseas ethnic Chinese scientists to acquire foreign technologies.

In the same Associated Press interview, the FBI official labeled China “the greatest espionage threat to the U.S. over the next ten to fifteen years.” Echoing the now largely forgotten Cox Report, he said the Chinese have set up more than three thousand “front” companies in the U.S. to run espionage operations.

Overall, the FBI believes that there are now more foreign spies operating in the U.S. than ever before. To counter this threat, the FBI is trying to rebuild its counter-espionage capabilities, which were largely dismantled in the 1990s. The FBI sections devoted to Chinese espionage were hit especially hard. The bureau is now trying to reconstitute that capability, but such a feat cannot be accomplished.

—NewsMax magazine, November 2003, p. 24