3 Democrat House Members Trips to Iraq Paid for by Sadaam

From a Fox news article in 2002:

The remarks were blasted by Sen. Don Nickles, R-Okla., who said, “both sound somewhat like spokespersons for the Iraqi government.”

This is just breaking, but intel reports just released shows that 3 members of the US House of Representatives traveled to Iraq financed by Sadaam Hussein’s intelligence agency in 2002, just before the Iraq war started. The trip appears to have been financed by yet another “Oil for food” Scam. From AP:

An indictment in Detroit accuses Muthanna Al-Hanooti of arranging for three members of Congress to travel to Iraq in October 2002 at the behest of Saddam’s regime. Prosecutors say Iraqi intelligence officials paid for the trip through an intermediary.

In exchange, Al-Hanooti allegedly received 2 million barrels of Iraqi oil.

The lawmakers are not mentioned but the dates correspond to a trip by Democratic Reps. Jim McDermott of Washington, David Bonior of Michigan and Mike Thompson of California. There was no indication the three lawmakers knew the trip was underwritten by Saddam.

I’m sure that there will be forthcoming denials from all three, and please, whatever you do, just don’t question their patriotism…

This article had them taking heat over the trip in 2002, how hot would it have been if their constituents knew that Sadaam paid via oil?

WASHINGTON —  Three congressmen who raised eyebrows during a recent trip to Iraq repeated their assertions that the war drums in Washington are beating too loudly.

On Wednesday, Reps. David Bonior, D-Mich., and Jim McDermott, D-Wash.– who were joined by Rep. Mike Thompson, D-Calif., on the trip — held a press conference to further their argument that the United States should allow more time for international diplomacy rather than rushing off to war.

They said the Bush administration should give weapons inspections a chance to work before taking any military action.

Here’s a Google search for articles tagged “Bonior Iraq” from 2002, note that most are “pay per view”

Here’s a Google search for “Al Hanooti” in 2002, and this news appears very much related to the HLF trial.  I’ll leave it to the journos who have Lexis Nexus access to dig the facts out of these.

UPDATE From Fox News (Who doesn’t put their archives behind a pay-per-view wall, hats off to them ! ) As predicted above spokespersons are denying all knowledge, and saying they were making the trip “for the children.” This even though highly controversial remarks were made by McDermott live from Baghdad at the time about the potential of war and UN Resolutions having nothing to do with the purported reason for the trip.

UPDATE: From CNN, apparently this was quite the Boondoggle, $34,000.00 is a tad much for three congresscritters on one trip wouldn’t you think?

Those services included providing the Iraqi government with the names of U.S. members of Congress believed to favor the lifting of sanctions against Iraq, arranging for delegations of those members to visit Iraq and traveling with those delegations, the indictment states.

Dean Boyd, a spokesman for the Department of Justice, said no member of Congress was aware of al-Hanooti’s alleged activities. “None of the congressional representatives are accused of any wrongdoing, and we have no information whatsoever that any of them were aware of the involvement of the Iraqi Intelligence Service,” he said.

According to the indictment, the Iraqi Intelligence Service paid $34,000 through an intermediary to Life for Relief and Development, the charity that employed al-Hanooti, to pay the delegation’s travel expenses.

UPDATE: More on Al Hanooti and his homeboys backgrounds from Patrick Poole.

UPDATE: This is what George F Will had to say about the trip back then, even before we knew that Sadaam’s intelligence agency footed the bill for the trip, from Seattle PI:

McDermott and Bonior are two specimens of what Lenin, referring to Westerners who denied the existence of Lenin’s police-state terror, called “useful idiots.” Perhaps Iraqi officials, knowing fathomless gullibility when they see it — they have dealt with U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan — actually said such things. Or perhaps McDermott and Bonior heard what they wished to hear. Either way, these innocents abroad should have known that Iraq’s proclaimed policy is: The only permissible inspections would be those permitted by the 1998 agreement Saddam reached with his servant, Annan, who was last seen doing his Neville Chamberlain impersonation, waving a piece of paper (Iraq’s recent letter promising weapons inspections “without conditions”) that he said meant peace in our time. Under the 1998 agreement, various inspections are forbidden, such as any at eight “presidential sites” — about 12 square miles of facilities, with thousands of buildings.

McDermott sided with Saddam in opposing what McDermott calls the “coercive stuff” — inspections backed by force, which are the only kind that have even a remote chance of being productive. Parroting Saddam’s line to perfection, he said “Iraq did not drive the inspectors out, we” — actually, the U.N. — “took them out. So they should be given a chance.” His implication is that America, not Iraq, foiled inspections.

Bonior’s contribution from Baghdad was to charge that “a horrendous, barbaric, horrific” number of cases of childhood leukemia and lymphomas have been caused by “uranium that has been part of our weapons system that was dropped here during the last war.” These weapons “are coated with uranium that atomize and cause these serious health problems.”


6 responses to “3 Democrat House Members Trips to Iraq Paid for by Sadaam”

  1. “held a press conference to further their argument that the United States should allow more time for international diplomacy rather than rushing off to war.”

    And the problem with that was….?

  2. Ask their peers in the party who voted for the war. Better yet, ask the Kurds http://tw.youtube.com/watch?v=HW6mX_j3VRE


    the documentary is in several parts, please watch them all, they are in the sidebar on the youtube page. I know that “mustard gas and sarin supposedly weren’t the WMD’s we were looking for” according to the left, but the reality is that we found >500 shells containing them. Some were even used in IED’s against us.

  3. I know that “mustard gas and sarin supposedly weren’t the WMD’s we were looking for” according to the left…

    Santorum! This again? You aren’t really going to argue that we went to war because Saddam didn’t properly dispose of degraded munitions from the ’80’s, are you? You might want to pick a different argument, ’cause it wasn’t the ‘left’ saying that, it was:

    The U.S. military announced in 2004 in Iraq that several crates of the old shells had been uncovered and that they contained a blister agent that was no longer active. Neither the military nor the White House nor the CIA considered the shells to be evidence of what was alleged by the Bush administration to be a current Iraqi program to make chemical, biological and nuclear weapons.

    Last night, intelligence officials reaffirmed that the shells were old and were not the suspected weapons of mass destruction sought in Iraq after the 2003 invasion.

  4. Can I put you in a room and open one? I mean they aren’t dangerous right? You saw the films hopefully. They are banned weapons, and there were many more caches found, some as late as 2006.
    Here, go chew on this awhile.


    Is that Al Gore I see with the Iraqi Spy and ex-head of CAIR Michigan?

  5. Good grief. Anyway, I’d say that Will was definately wrong there. They were neither “useful” (as we invaded regardless) nor “idiots” (they weren’t convinced that Saddam possessed the WMD stockpiles, and we did call off the inspectors).

    You aren’t the only righty blogger I’ve seen trying to make hay out of this, and I gotta say that it’s a pretty incredible stretch. I mean, they weren’t aware of the Saddam connection to the funds, and Bush’s State Dept. approved the darn thing anyway. I suppose it can make a nice misleading headline though.

  6. Did I say they knew? The mistake was in not checking more closely the people funding this. The other mistake was in abetting a known tyrant’s agenda. WIthout support from people like McDermott, he might have gone into exile without a war, and there’s strong evidence that he was willing to do so at one point. While Russia and France were much more supportive than the Dem dupes, they certainly added to either his illusion or delusion that we would not go to war.

    Also be aware that things get worse and worse as more is uncovered, here’s an update: