Court ordered Scott Ritter to attend counseling for sex offenders

WTEN.com (Albany, NY) ^ | January 20, 2002

[cyncooper]

Disappointed at Fox News for mentioning the fact that Ritter denied the charge?

No, I wasn't disappointed in Fox mentioning that Ritter denied the charge. I was disappointed they didn't report that he denied it when first asked about this story, then go on to give some context.

Fox neglected to be up-to-the-minute by stating, that since his denial his lawyer had confirmed and a local television station had pictures and footage. The lawyer's statement and at least the still photo all available before Brit's show went on-air.

[auboy]

LOL… good one, RippleFire!

[SarahW]

That puzzled me, too. It's his picture and his lawyer admitted it was he who was arrested.

The other context in the story (the firing of the assistant DA for keeping her boss in the dark about a "sensitive" case) was also not reported.

Ritter claimed mistaken identity. That was a very big lie.

It was hard to make out Ritter's character before this story broke. Most, I think, had settled on the conclusion that if he wasn't on the take, he was a whack job, even folks I know who were partial to his point of view. Now, its clear he's a big liar with serious character issues (probably including a narcissistic personality disorder).

Why isn't this a story? Why isn't his lame claim of mistaken identity put to rest?

[cyncooper]

The other context in the story (the firing of the assistant DA for keeping her boss in the dark about a "sensitive" case) was also not reported.

I agree, this aspect hopefully is being looked into by Fox News.

[Mad_Tom_Rackham]

Did I smear him? No. How could I do that using his own words?

The best way to battle the socialists IMO is the constantly refute their positions with logic. They count on emotions ("feelings") to whip their side into a frenzy of action. Thus, their arguments almost NEVER stand up to logical review.

I find it particulary fascinating that the socialists (or communists, whatever you wish to call them, they are totalitarianists in the end) invariably end up accusing their conservative/libertarian opponents of the same deeds that they in fact are trying to perpetrate. Hence the title of Pitt's sophomoric piece "...American Fascist". When Pitt and his fellow socialists are in truth the Fascists.

Freedom of speech for them means freedom for them to speak, not their opposition. Freedom of association for them means freedom for them to associate with whom they wish, not their opposition (Boy Scouts, etc.).

I begin to hope that a conservative tide is turning, and this was accelerated by 9-11. The socialists here in the USA will eventually lose, IMO. But we ahave our work to do.