Admittedly, Scott Ritter's behavior exceeds simple womanizing on the Creep-O Scale, but again, how does his behavior have anything to do with his radical change in his position on Iraq? As I posted earlier, Miss Marple wrote that the facts of his behavior suggest that Ritter is "blackmailable." That's a fair accusation, which sheds doubt on his highly publicized change of attitude on Saddam. But to offer a reasonable suggestion of his "blackmailableness" is a far cry from taking this story as proof-positive that he's being blackmailed, and THE explanation for his shift in opinion.
I think a better explanation is that this news shows that Scott Ritter is a moral reprobate, and as a moral reprobate, he's lost his ability to distinguish good from evil, and, hence, his inability to see the truth about Saddam and the necessity to go up against him. That, to me, is where any linkage exists, but no one has said that on this thread.