Posted on 01/25/2003 5:02:56 PM PST by OneLoyalAmerican
Greetings Freepers, et al:
At this point I've collected a mountain of circumstantial evidence which indicates something very significant occurred on or about October 28, 1997. The event seriously undermined UNSCOM and changed the course of history.
Given last week's revelation: "Ritter the pedophile wannabe," changed our frame of reference with Iraq, UNSCOM, and Ritter. Chances are some FReeper knows or is a former UNSCOM team member, or perhaps several FReeper lurkers each hold one piece to the Ritter puzzle. Collected and assembled here, we might see the big picture. So, I’m asking for Freeper help.
Scott Ritter undergoes an amazing metamorphism between late 1997 and early 1998. For six years, Ritter's language indicates a genuine "fall on the sword for the USA" Marine Corps Major; where his vocal critics called him a spy with every move.
Suddenly, on October 29, 1997, Iraq becomes not just uncooperative, but downright belligerent. Afterward Ritter's rhetoric gradually becomes anti-US, anti-Richard Butler, anti-UN and "for the children." From that point Butler’s carefully worded conversations only speak of Ritter as a good inspector. Within months, Ritter becomes the critics hero.
Experts claim sexual predators are incurable. Amn Al-Khass logically has KBG influence for tactics and strategy. Ritter's attraction to young looking women ruined his first marriage. Did Amn Al-Khass compromise Ritter?
This preponderance of circumstantial evidence indicates a likely hood Ritter was compromised in August 1997. Perhaps pedophilia was causation in fact for Ritter's 1998 resignation from UNSCOM? But for UNSCOM, the damage was done.
And this Time Magazine interview always perplexed me.
TIME: You've spoke about having seen the children's prisons in Iraq. Can you describe what you saw there?
RITTER: The prison in question is at the General Security Services headquarters, which was inspected by my team in Jan. 1998. It appeared to be a prison for children — toddlers up to pre-adolescents — whose only crime was to be the offspring of those who have spoken out politically against the regime of Saddam Hussein. It was a horrific scene. Actually I'm not going to describe what I saw there because what I saw was so horrible that it can be used by those who would want to promote war with Iraq, and right now I'm waging peace.
While US armed forces parent are deployed overseas, Scott Ritter stalked our children at home. Perhaps this sexual predator had an appetite for Iraqi children too?
So FReepers, help me scour the world, let's leave not a stone unturned. Let's build this thread with links, and post relevant text, in the event the link suddenly disappears. :) And help me find out what really happened in October 1997.
Let's wake the sleeping dog. Ping the FReeper knowledge base.
Key events in UN weapons inspections in Iraq By AP September 17 2002
Factbox: Key events in efforts to ensure Iraq does not have chemical, biological or nuclear weapons:
February 24, 1991: Gulf War ends; Kuwait is liberated on February 27
April 6, 1991: Iraq accepts UN resolution requiring it to end its weapons of mass destruction programs and allow for ongoing monitoring and verification of compliance.
October 29, 1997: Iraq demands that Americans on the UN Special Commission inspection team leave; the Americans leave temporarily but return on November 20.
January 13, 1998: Iraq temporarily withdraws cooperation, claiming the inspection team had too many US and British inspectors.
January 22, 1998: Iraq refuses inspection of presidential sites.
February 20-23, 1998: UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan secures Iraq's cooperation and unrestricted access to inspectors.
October 31, 1998: Iraq ends all forms of cooperation with UNSCOM. UNSCOM withdraws.
November 14, 1998: Iraq allows inspections to resume.
December 16, 1998: UNSCOM removes all staff from Iraq after inspectors conclude Iraq is not fully cooperating. Four days of US and British airstrikes follow.
June 30, 1999: Richard Butler completes his two-year term as executive chairman of UNSCOM.
December 17, 1999: UN replaces UNSCOM with UNMOVIC, the UN Monitoring Verification and Inspection Commission. Iraq rejects the resolution.
March 1, 2000: Hans Blix assumes post of executive chairman of UNMOVIC.
November 2000: Iraq rejects new weapons inspections proposals.
July 5, 2002: In talks with Annan, Iraq rejects weapons inspections proposals.
August 1: In a letter to Annan, Iraq invites Blix to Iraq for technical discussions on remaining disarmament issues.
August 6: Annan writes to Iraqis pointing out that what they are proposing is at odds with UN resolutions and asks that Iraq accept inspections.
September 12: US President George W Bush tells the United Nations it must rid the world of Saddam's biological, chemical and nuclear arsenals, or stand aside as the United States acts.
September 16: Iraq unconditionally accepts the return of UN weapons inspectors.
America's Fifth Column ... watch Steve Emerson/PBS documentary JIHAD! In America
New Link: Download 8 Mb zip file here (60 minute video)
No, absolutely not!!! It was that 10 year old girl with the big brown eyes.
Why covered for Ritter in Albany and why? He got caught twice in 2 months; there must be many other places where he's been caught, as well. Can we track and list the locations where he's lived and worked over the past ten years? Then can we check the sex offenders list for those locations to see if he comes up with his name or, maybe, an alias?
There is no doubt in my mind that Ritter was turned because of his child molestation. That this has been covered may mean that he has been double turned and is so useful to another government, ours, Israel or Iran, that locals are protecting him to maintain the pretext of the pro-Iraqi turn.
During a subsequent visit by Ambassador Butler, Iraq `presidential and sovereign sites' to inspection. In a recent speech, Saddam Hussein stated his decision to expel UNSCOM by May 20 if sanctions remain in place.
< snip > Let me take just a moment to recount how we have come to the point where military force may be employed in the near future.
Q Do you have any reaction to Scott Ritter's comments this morning about U.S. change in policy on Iraq and his criticism of this administration's unwillingness to press the inspections issue?
MR. TOIV: Look, I can help you a little bit, but again, Sandy can probably do a lot better. But U.S. policy toward Iraq has not changed. Our goal since 1991 has been to contain this dangerous regime and keep them from getting dangerous weapons of mass destruction. Iraq has repeatedly challenged those goals and in every instance the U.S. has led an international response that has forced them to back down.
We're engaging in mobilizing the international community again to press Iraq and we've already received strong backing from the Security Council that Iraq's actions are totally unacceptable, and the President will be raising this issue next week in Moscow as well.
We are seeking a U.N. resolution to suspend sanctions reviews indefinitely until Iraq complies, and that sends Baghdad a sharp signal that its actions have further extended the sanctions that have already cost them over $120 billion. We are also tightening the sanctions enforcement further by cutting down on illegal Iraqi oil exports in the Gulf, and we've not ruled out using other options at a time and place of our own choosing, if diplomatic means do not convince Iraq to comply.
I'll leave any follow-ups to Sandy.
Maybe Clinton did him in ;)
Q: Joe, one more on Iraq. Does the White House have any comment on Scott Ritter's comments, that the only way to settle this is to bomb Iraq?
LOCKHART: No.
Q: Didn't you, yourself, the other day point out that one of the most aggressive inspectors was a Russian, probably disliked by the Iraqis even more than Scott Ritter?
MCCURRY: No, I pointed out that when -- not long ago, or after the stand-off with Iraq in November, one outcome was the establishment of technical evaluation teams that went in to evaluate on an almost like a peer basis some of the work that the Special Commission was doing in Iraq, one of them headed by a Russian arms control expert which produced a report that fully confirmed -- I think it's fair to say fully confirmed -- many of the reports that were given by Mr. Butler to the Security Council.
It is not an objection, per se, to any national, it's more an endorsement of the current structure, the way it works, the reasons why we think it's effective. We are going through a period now in which we're getting ready to establish a diplomatic element in one aspect of the Special Council work, and that should be administered carefully and probably not wise to make larger, broader changes in the structure of the Special Commission at this time.
It occurred to me the other day that maybe Ritter was discovered and "turned" by Saddam before he was thrown out of the country. His indignation about Saddam hiding weapons was an act to get a reputation as a principled man who would then have credibility when he "changed his mind" about Iraq.
Not being able to read everything going on, has anyone mentioned this possibility before? My thought was how perfect the ruse would have been had he not gotten caught being a pervert again.
Dec 17, 1998
34. The resignation from UNSCOM of U.S. inspector Scott Ritter in August 1998 brought to light his claim that the inspection regime has not been intrusive enough, and that Iraq is far from being free of WMD. A subsequent unclassified CIA assessment concluded that, if the U.N. halted its inspection, Iraq could resume with relative ease its production of chemical and biological weapons and that “it could be developing 46 nuclear weapons right now and the U.S. would not know about it.” See John Donnelly, “CIA: Iraq Could Restart Doomsday Line ‘Overnight’,” Defense Week, September 8, 1998, p. 1. There have been recent claims that Iraq is “hiding components for three nuclear weapons.” London Times, September 10, 1998, reprinted in Early Bird, September 10, 1998, pp. 3-4.
It appears that up until at least 1999 he believed they were still a threat an military strikes were needed. Perhaps it was his loyalty to Clinton (another sexual predator) which drove him against Bush...
Although he’s officially an engineer officer with the Army, Beerman-Ahmed was also trained as a chemical officer by the Air Force. He has a great deal of experience with the Air Force Special Operations Command. A Gulf War veteran, he has “regularly gone to the Middle East” for a variety of assignments, most of which remain classified. Many of those assignments have been conducted in Kuwait and Iraq. He also served as a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq between 1996 and 1998. “I was one of the last people out of Iraq, before Operation Desert Fox started at the end of 1998,” Beerman-Ahmed said, adding that he was assigned to replace Scott Ritter, who had been expelled by Saddam Hussein.
With a background that includes training and experience in weapons of mass destruction, he was called to active duty in mid-January. “I went from civilian to soldier in just two weeks – which is incredible,” he said.
But could that have been part of the plan? Saddam knew Clinton wouldn't do anything, so it was useful having Scott continue to develop the reputation that he was a very principled man. I just can't help but think he was discovered by Saddam while he was an inspector and his star status as a principled inspector was part of the plan.
Maybe it's time for me to get out the Reynolds Wrap... but I just have this strong feeling that it was all a setup from before he made a name for himself.
Washington, DC - Three former senior UN officials denounced and called for the lifting of economic sanctions against Iraq at a congressional briefing on Wednesday, May 3. Former UN Humanitarian Coordinators in Iraq, Hans von Sponeck and Denis Halliday, and former weapons inspector Scott Ritter, called on the US government to abandon its policy economic sanctions against Iraq. Despite their diverse backgrounds, all three agreed that economic sanctions are the principle cause of the humanitarian disaster in Iraq, and dismissed claims that American policy is not to blame. US Representatives Dennis Kucinich (D-OH), John Conyers (D-MI) and Cynthia McKinney (D-GA) also called for the lifting of sanctions.
Former UN weapons inspector in Iraq Scott Ritter debunked what he called “the myth” of a threat from Iraqi weapons of mass destruction, which typically cited as a reason for maintaining sanctions. Calling himself "an unlikely ally in this matter," Ritter said that "a lot of the blame for this perception can be laid at my doorstep." But, Ritter said, “the reality is that when you judge Iraq’s current weapons of mass destruction capabilities today, they have none.”
At the 3828th meeting of the Security Council, held on 29 October 1997 in connection with the Council's consideration of the item entitled "The situation between Iraq and Kuwait", the President of the Security Council made the following statement on behalf of the Council:
"The Security Council has considered the letter of 29 October 1997 from the Deputy Prime Minister of Iraq to the President of the Security Council conveying the unacceptable decision of the Government of Iraq to seek to impose conditions on its cooperation with the Special Commission, thereby preventing the Special Commission from discharging its responsibilities under resolutions 687 (1991), 699 (1991), 707 (1991), 715 (1991), 1051 (1996), 1060 (1996), 1115 (1997) and 1134 (1997). "The Security Council recalls its demands in resolution 1134 (1997) that Iraq cooperate fully with the Special Commission in accordance with the relevant resolutions, which constitute the governing standard of Iraqi compliance.
"The Security Council condemns the decision of the Government of Iraq to try to dictate the terms of its compliance with its obligation to cooperate with the Special Commission. It demands that Iraq cooperate fully, in accordance with the relevant resolutions, without conditions or restrictions, with the Special Commission in the implementation of its mandate. The Council furthermore reminds the Government of Iraq of its responsibility for the safety and security of the personnel of the Special Commission and its inspection teams.
"The Security Council warns of the serious consequences of Iraq's failure to comply immediately and fully with its obligations under the relevant resolutions. The Council is determined to ensure rapid and full Iraqi compliance with the relevant resolutions and for that purpose will remain actively seized of the matter."
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.