Scott Ritter
 

I am currently watching him on CNN's Talk Back Live. Anyone care to offer their opinion of the man and his message?

What is his message?

The brain is a wonderful organ. It starts working the moment you get up and does not stop until you get into the office. - Robert Frost


It applies to him, believe me.

Scott Ritter was a major actor on the UN's inspection team until Sadam disallowed further inspection. Bottom line is, he is against invading Iraq unless Bush can prove what he is saying about the WMD that Bush claims Sadam has and is building. He is entirely in favor of putting inspectors back in and if Sadam begins playing the games he played before, then the US will have legitimate cause to invade and will probably have World opinion behind a US invasion. Some are calling him a traitor, because of his recent visit to Iraq and taking his message to Iraqi leaders.

The best quote ever from Scott Ritter:

Time Magazine: Some on the right call you the new Jane Fonda, and joke about what you'll call your exercise video.

Scott Ritter: (Long pause?) Those on the right who say that disgrace the 12 years of service I gave to my country as a Marine. I love my country. I'll put my record of service up against anyone, bar none. If they want to have an exercise video then why don't they come here and say it to my face and I'll give'm an exercise video, which will be called, "Scott Ritter Kicking Their Ass."

http://www.time.com/time/nation/arti...351165,00.html

That quote makes me like him a lot. ;>

Cheers,
Backov

Wasn't he the pretend gay guy in Threes Company?

Read MrFiction's post, the big letters.

I'm sorry, but I think he's a flake. One day its "Oh, you guys don't know all the shit they're hiding from us" and now its "What? They don't have a damn thing!"

agree... I think he was and is after his 15 Min.'s of fame and looks like he got it.. I saw him on CNN and I think he's a double talker... he should run for congress... he'd fit RAT in....

he spent a great deal of his time with the original inspectors testifying to what a grave threat Saddam Hussein is, how many weapons were not accounted for, how quickly he could rebuild his arsenals etc etc etc.

today, he is spending a great deal of his time saying "huh... what? you are twisting what i said... i didnt say that, what i said was...."

regardless of what may or may not be true... i think i could question the "patriotism"of someone who once gave testimony to the UN as to how horrible and dangerous Saddam Hussein is, how many weapons they have, how they are hindering the inspections process etc..... then has the balls to go before the Iraqi National Congress recently and give similar testimony against his own country, against the UN, against the inspections process and against the world.

given the situation, i would say that is borderline treason.

this is why the media is tearing him apart.

I don't know much about him other than what I heard on Talkback Live, but it seemed to me that people, particularly the hostess, were twisting his words on the show.

He kept saying that he wanted weapons inspectors to go in because he thought Saddam would mess with things and give a legitimate reason for invasion which the world would stand behind.

When he said this, they always came back with comments like "so you don't think the US should invade??".

I thought it was pretty clear he was saying the inspections and likely fiasco to follow would likely provide a solid legal reason to invade, rather than the current thin argument.

he has changed his tone considerably with each new interview
it is easy to take it out of context without taking a careful look at the timeline of Scott Ritter and his statements and testimony.

dont forget that he also gave a big speach before the Iraqis not too long ago denouncing the US as using it as a process to spy on Iraq etc. this in itself, is illegal and is treasonous.

his original tone when he recently appeared on the radar was pretty much anti US and pro-Iraqi and he made some pretty bizzare remarks which contradicted his own testimony to the US Government and UN.

basically, his original stance began with telling the world how dangerous iraq was and how grave the threat was that they presented to the world.

then recently he began saying that Iraq is not a threat and there is no evidence to suggest that they are a threat. he made many remarks recently that fully contradicted everything he said 8 years ago.

he testified in the 90's how dangerous Iraq was, how many weapons were unnacounted for and that it would take them only 6 months to completely rebuild everything that was destroyed.

today he is basically saying "they are not a threat, there is no proof they are a threat, i dont know what you are talking about"

only VERY recently did he start saying that the inspections process should resume BEFORE any punitive action is taken.

his story has changed several times. i saw him the other day on MSNBC, CNN, and a couple other channels all in one day. they did a pretty good job in showing how he is contradicting himself and how his recent remarks directly contradict everything he has said in the past as a weapons inspector.

Dude, when you type, Rush Limbaugh's words come out. I have just one thing to say:

Turn off the radio!

Agree with him or not, Scott Ritter knows far more about this issue than Rush ever will.

it does not matter bush has motives for war that has nothing to do with the real reason.

If there is no war then he knows that the investigation into his corporate loan BS (that ceo's are going to jail now for) and chenys shady corporate dealing will most likly come out and it will be nasty

There is no reason for war everyone knows that

i have no idea what you are talking about
and i dont have a radio. :(

i have not, nor have i ever heard rush limbaugh say anything about scott ritter - nor do i care too, since i dont listen to rush limbaugh

i am talking about the facts. i am talking about the chronology of events, of scott ritters testimonies and statements and remarks. particularly recently where he has changed his tone considerably as everyone continues to hammer him on the contradictions of his message.

i am sorry that reality offends you :(

NOW GO FUCK YOURSELF!!!
:321GFY

hmmmm.... for some reason i doubt that in your partisan rhetoric you were one of those screaming the Clinton wanted to bomb Yugoslavia ONLY to deflect the worlds attention from the fact that he was lying to congress and his sperm was splattered all over monicas dress.
:thumbsup

ho cares we have no say anyway

:thumbsup


You should take that as a compliment ! Rush is a successful guy ! :)

haha... agreed

the eternal law of politics is that for every outspoken moron, there is an equal and opposite outspoken moron.

they always cancel each other out in the end. so passionate political debate is fairly futile simply because it provokes an equal response from the other side.

This is my understanding/opinion of the Scott Ritter nutcase:

He led UNSCOM in IRAQ for several years after Desert Storm, searching for and destroying Iraq's weapons of mass destruction.

Then, in 1998 he abruptly QUIT! You have to hear and understand why he quit. He quit because he said Iraq was hiding MASSIVE amounts of weapons of mass destruction, and that America would not let him go after the weapons aggresively enough.

He left Iraq stating that Iraq had tons and tons of weapons of mass destruction and that he was not allowed to be aggressive enough to find them. He has NEVER been back to Iraq or had any way of seeing what has happened to any of those TONS of weapons he stated they were hiding.

Now, several years later and after having NO further access in Iraq or involvement in UNSCOM or anything else relevant, he has now done a complete about face and claims they have NO weapons of mass destruction.

In other words, he left Iraq saying they had a huge arsenal, now after never having been back, he claims they have none. That in and of itself is more than enough to prove this kook is full of shit.

It's pretty obvious he has a grudge against his former employers (America/UN) and is doing everything he can to h.urt them, and to keep his name in the headlines. What a scumbag.

I probably have seen every interview that Ritter has given on TV. In my opinion his message has remained the same from 1997 or '98 until the present. I have seen interviewers and opponents try to twist his words by comparing statements from 1997 or '98 to statements that he is currently making and in my opinion they have not been able to discredit anything that he has said. His bottom line message is two fold, if the Bush Administration has proof of what they are saying about WMD then show the proof to, at least our allies, and if the proof is convincing they will get on board. He personally does not think that they have reconstituted their ablility to produce WMD because our spys in the sky would have monitored the activity required to reconstitute their ability to produce WMD and thus ample proof would exist. If they do not have the proof, then they don't have the legal right, under international law to invade Iraq. The second part of his message is to get the Inspectors back into Iraq, because he believes that Sadam will blow it again by playing games with the inspectors and then we would have every legal right to take the man out. I don't consider the man to be a traitor by any measurement. I do think that he enjoys being in the spotlight. While I am convinced that WMD is, in part, a propaganda ploy being used to rally the American people to the flag, I also am not really against an invasion of Iraq, for what I believe are the real motives, for invading Iraq.

Several posts in this thread could be used in a college class as an example of the power of government propaganda.

You could argue this point by point, but then someone would just turn the TV or radio back on. Why bother?

A very interesting time to be alive. :)

Mr Ritter was paid $400,000.00 from an Iraqi American business man. He actually admits it.
So if you still wonde why he changed his minds, wonder no more...

A couple of you have your heads straight up your ass. He QUIT his job because he was so mad that Iraq was hiding tons of weapons and the UN/US wouldn't let him go after them.

Then, without having any further inspections or activity in Iraq, he now completely states the opposite, that Iraq has no weapons of mass destruction. The only people willing to believe this kook would be people who's political agenda fall in line with what this guy is trying to pull.

Mr.Fiction if anyone needs to stop spouting party line shit it is you.

Deal in the facts, not the spin you want to use to further your own beliefs. This has nothing to do with with wether or not Iraq should be attacked etc , it is all about the fact that Ritter is a fucking nutcase liar.

He has always maintained that the inspectors had destroyed approximately 95% of WMD. I believe his primary reason for quitting was because the Inspection teams, had turned into spy teams, more than the business of seeking out and destroying WMD. He says that he notified Richard Butler about his concern in three different memorandoms. Many of his interviewers, have tried to make much about him saying in '98 that Iraq could reconstitute there ability to manufacture WMD in a matter of six months. He does not deny saying this, but maintains that if they have in fact reconstituted their ability to manufacture WMD, that this cannot be done in a vacuum and our spys in the sky would have recorded this activity, thus proof would exist and could easily be shown to our allies.

Read the post above.

there are consistencies in what he says today and what he said then.

however, my point was that he also went to great lengths to make the point that Saddam Hussein was a threat. He stated that Saddam Hussein could rebuild his weapons supplies in 6 months. he went on and on to talk about how bad Saddam Hussein is.

today - in recent history, he went on a massive publicity campaign saying "huh... what are you talking about, what threat, how do you know they are a threat"

there are many contradictions in his original testimony about the threat of Saddam Hussein and the fact that today, he is saying the opposite and that verification is needed in the form of inspections yada yada yada.

what i am talking about is that he recently went before the world saying that Iraq does not have weapons of mass destruction... whereas in the early 90's he was testifying that they did, that much of those weapons was unnacounted for and that his chemical and biological weapons programs were largely in tact and he could rebuild everything that was destroyed in 6 months.


http://www.cnn.com/2002/WORLD/meast/...nna/index.html
"RITTER: What I'm very certain of is that the Bush administration has not provided any evidence to substantiate its allegations that Saddam Hussein's regime is currently pursuing weapons of mass destruction programs or is in actual possession of weapons of mass destruction"

Scott Ritter in Pro-Iraq Movie Deal

Ritter claims that the movie went over the $400,000 dollar budget and that he is currently in debt. I don't know of anyone that has agreed to show the movie.

its a sad story because we really don't know who is telling the truth

Massivecock does. Ask him.

It's a shame to be able to say this but as much confusion as this is causing there's a 50% chance that whatever Massivecock says could be true.

Oh no. It looks like Massivecock's crusade may be making converts.:(