Useful Idiots, Five Years Later

Useful Idiots, Five Years Later
Vol: 78 Issue: 27 Thursday, March 27, 2008

Back on September 30, 2002, six months before the US invasion, a group of liberal lawmakers travelled to Baghdad, from which place they angrily denounced their president and their country.

The lawmakers were Representative Jim McDermott [D–Wa] Representative David Bonior [D-Mi] and Representative Mike Thompson [D-Ca].

The reason they made the trip was to oppose the congressional resolution that was still being hammered out that would authorize military force against Iraq.

Congressman Jim McDermott, speaking from the enemy capital city, told ABC’s George Stephanopolis, (a former presidential advisor), that, when it comes to Iraq, the President of the United States would be only too happy to lie to the public.

“I think the president would mislead the American people,” Mr. McDermott said on ABC’s “This Week” about the president’s campaign for support for a military campaign against Iraq.

In the same news cycle, McDermott also told CNN that; “We don’t have to pass a resolution in the Congress or in the Security Council right now. Things are moving forward.”

Appearing on Fox News, McDermott said that America needs to ‘take Iraq at its word’, adding that “[The Bush administration] keeps “saying they want a regime change because they want control of the oil fields.”

(“Regime change” in Iraq was first articulated as official US policy by President William Jefferson Clinton in 1998 during the ‘Operation Desert Fox’ bombing of Baghdad.)

Remember the chant, “No blood for oil?” (Gas prices have jumped three hundred percent since the Bush administration, sensitive to the charge, refused to take control of Iraq’s oil fields.)

“The Iraqis we have talked to,” Representative Bonior chimed in from the enemy capital, “have said basically [inspectors] will have that unrestricted ability to go wherever they want to inspect.”

I won’t go over the mountains of evidence that suggest Saddam DID have a WMD program that he shipped to Syria.

As in the captured Iraqi documents that proved a connection between Saddam and al-Qaeda, the evidence will eventually come to light, and, as in the al-Qaeda connection, nobody will believe the evidence anyway.

Their minds are already made up and are NOT to be confused by facts.

Be that as it may, back in September, 2002, it was obvious, at least to me, that they were serving as Saddam’s Useful Idiot Squad. (That statement back then earned me an avalanche of hate mail.)

Turns out the entire Congressional junket to Baghdad was paid for by Saddam Hussein himself.

Still wondering if Saddam found them useful?


The information came to light as a consequence of the trial of a former Iraqi intelligence agent named Muthanna al-Hanooti, whom the Associated Press described as “a Michigan charity official.”

Except the ‘charity’ was the Iraqi Oil-For-Food program, and al-Hanooti was rewarded for arranging the propaganda junket with two million dollars worth of Iraqi oil vouchers.

The ‘charity’ was “The Life For Relief and Development” set up after the first Gulf War to circumvent UN sanctions by funding ‘humanitarian work’ in Iraq. Of course, Bonior, McDermott and Thompson claim they ‘had no clue’ that Saddam was underwriting the trip.

Instead, they said they believed the charity (which was operating under Saddam’s protection, actively working against US Iraq policy, defending the Iraq regime and propagandizing against the US administration), paid for the trip, and therefore they are ‘innocent victims’.

(Is that not another way of admitting to being ‘useful idiots’ of an enemy government propaganda effort?)

If their denials are false, they are guilty of committing paid treason. If their denials are true, they stand convicted of the 2002 charge (laid by me,) accusing them of being Useful Idiots too blinded by partisanship to know the difference between dissent and treason.

They gave aid and comfort to the enemy, attacked their own government’s policies from an enemy capital, and now they claim they were ‘duped’ — as if it were a newly-discovered revelation.

(They could have read the September 30th Omega Letter and learned they were paid dupes of Saddam Hussein five years earlier.)

This revelation came to light, ironically enough, during the same week that a team of Harvard researchers concluded that public statements criticizing the war are responsible for a measurable ’emboldenment effect’ on al-Qaeda terrorists.

“According to a study by Radha Iyengar, a Robert Wood Johnson Scholar in health policy research at Harvard and Jonathan Monten of the Belfer Center at the university’s Kennedy School of Government, periods of intense news media coverage in the United States of criticism about the war, or of polling about public opinion on the conflict, are followed by a small but quantifiable increases in the number of attacks on civilians and U.S. forces in Iraq,” the UPI reported on the study.

“We find that in periods immediately after a spike in anti-resolve statements, the level of insurgent attacks increases,” says the study, published earlier this month by the National Bureau of Economic Research, a leading U.S. nonprofit economic research organization.

In Iraqi provinces that were broadly comparable in social and economic terms, attacks increased between 7 percent and 10 percent following what the researchers call “high-mention weeks,” like the two just before the November 2006 election.

The study also found that attacks increased more in parts of Iraq like Anbar province, where there is greater access to international news media, measured by the proportion of households with satellite TV, which its authors say increases the credibility of their findings.

So, what does it mean? It means that the Useful Idiots are, as the term implies, both ‘useful’ and ‘idiots’.

It means that when a Jim McDermott or a David Bonior (or a Nancy Pelosi, Harry Reid, Ted Kennedy, Dick Durban, Chuck Hegel etc., etc., ad nauseum) launches a partisan attack against the government, some American soldier serving in Iraq pays for their politics with his life.

Every time Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama promises an immediate withdrawal from Iraq, the insurgents, believing they have the US on the ropes, go out and kill as many Americans as possible.

If they can’t get to any Americans, they kill Iraqi civilians.

It is so obvious that your humble correspondent, a person of average intelligence, and limited resources — and living in another country at the time — upon examining the same data, came to the exact same conclusion — five years ago. (Volume 12, Issue 30, Monday, September 30th, 2002)

So it is incomprehensible to me that anybody could credibly claim they were unaware of the US blood they were spilling as a consequence of their lust for power, their denials notwithstanding.

Every politician or media editorial that proclaims the surge a failure, or that the US lied to justify the war, or that the war was camouflage for stealing Iraqi oil, or calls for immediate withdrawal has US blood on his hands.

If they didn’t know when we did (five years ago) they certainly know now. Which is probably why the mainstream media has spiked this report.

I Googled the report’s lead author, Radha Iyengar, and got TWO hits; the UPI story, and one by the liberal advocacy group, NewsHounds (motto: We Watch Fox News So You Don’t Have To) slamming the study as ‘propaganda’.

(Propaganda for whom? America? By elected US representatives? Horrors! Or propaganda for the Bush administration? No similar left-wing criticism has been offered regarding McDermott & Co.)

ABC spiked the story, as did CBS, NBC, etc. The only major cable news mention came from Fox News, who mentioned it in passing during the half-hour news break.

(Am I the only one who wonders why a 24-hour news channel needs a five minute news break every thirty minutes?)

If the major mainstream news outlets DID cover the story, then they would pretty much have to admit that every time they criticized the US or called for an American withdrawal, they were deliberately calling for a new attack against US forces.

So they simply let the report’s conclusions die quietly of neglect.

What does that tell you? Here is what it tells me.

It tells me that the mainstream media and the antiwarrior politicians already KNEW that their coverage was responsible for increasing the US death toll in Iraq.

They KNEW that they were giving aid and comfort to the enemy all along.

If they had honestly just discovered that they had been useful idiots, unaware of their usefulness to the enemy, this report would be front page, above-the-fold news in every newspaper in the country. But it isn’t.

Because the headline would have to read, “US Lawmakers and Media Collude To Defeat United States War Effort.”

“Enemy propaganda report at eleven — stay tuned.”

This entry was posted in Briefings by Pete Garcia. Bookmark the permalink.

About Pete Garcia

Christian, father, husband, veteran, pilot, and sinner saved by grace. I am a firm believer in, and follower of Jesus Christ. I am Pre-Trib, Dispensational, and Non-Denominational (but I lean Southern Baptist).

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s