Ex-U.N. inspector visits Iraq to "prevent a war" (Ritter)

Reuters | 9/08/02

[Cincinatus]

The brainless CNN anchor almost gave it away -- "Ritter is in Bahgdad, partly on his own money and partly paid for by (pause)...sympathetic donors!"

Like Saddam Hussein.

[SkyPilot]

Memo to Ritter Critter....

Stay there.

[anniegetyourgun]

Cincy is right - he's on Saddam's payroll.

[heylady]

O'Brian just said" Ritter is a private citizen on a private trip partially funded by himself and partially funded by "sympathetic donors" Duh..do you think those sympathetic donors are Saddam and company?

[mhking]

Ritter claims to be in Iraq as a private citizen on a trip funded partially by "private interested donors" and funded partially by himself. For him to speak "as a loyal citizen of the United States" who claims to love this country and who wants to help prevent the US from making a terrible step, I would say is overstepping his bounds.

Don't we have laws preventing private citizens from enacting foreign policy for the US?

[mhking]

The brainless CNN anchor almost gave it away --

Actually Miles is one of the less-brain-dead folks in the newsroom there (I met him when I worked there); he's much less political than many of the folks there - unfortunately, he's stuck in a sea of fools.

Oh, I love it - Eason Jordan (CNN high-muckety-muck) is in Baghdad and is due to speak live on CNN at 8A ET.

They're accepting e-mails for Jordan at WAM@cnn.com

[Oldeconomybuyer]

[Peach]

I will bet cash money that CNN carries this speech live.

Definitely. Even though when Ritter was critical of the Clinton administration's lack of support of the UN inspectors in '98, no one carried his testimony before Congress except C-SPAN.

[Peach]

Makes you wonder what happened to make Ritter do a 180.

Follow the $$, as they say. He's either been bought or there's a slight chance he's an intelligence agent and is playing a game "pretending" to be on the side of Iraq.

[Peach]

Could it be that he's telling the truth?

He was either lying in '98 when he testified before Congress that Iraq posed a clear and present danger and was close to having operational nuclear weapons OR he's lying now when he says Iraq is not a threat and does not have WMD. No one has been permitted to inspect in Iraq for 4 years - there's no way Ritter knows what Saddam has or doesn't have anymore.

[G.Mason]

A little reading on Scott Ritter will open ones eyes about what kind of person this guy is.

This is Scott Ritter ( October 1998 )

[marvlus]

Ritter said the trip was at his own initiative "...as an American citizen concerned about the direction that my country is taking, I think that's the reason why I'm here."

Sounds like Ritter is unsure of himsef.

[piasa]

Good catch.

[not-alone]

He is worried about his movie deal($400,000) paid for by Iraq. He talked about it on cspan awhile back.

[JonH]

I am convinced he has been bought by the Iraquis... Nothing else makes sense.

[AppyPappy]

Could it be that he's telling the truth?

He can't possibbly know the truth. How would he know if Saddam DIDN'T have weapons?

[InvisibleChurch]

i wonder if irak has threatened to kill his family if he doesn't toady down to saddam

[kinghorse]

I've been saying this for months.

[kinghorse]

Here is where Bush is screwing up on justifying an attack on Iraq. Bush's people need to lissen up. You are making a case for Iraq being involved in the development of a nuke but most people do not understand why this is bad. Really. A lot of countries have nukes (too many for sure) but they aren't using them except as a deterrent.

Bush's people have done a piss poor job of explaining a doctrine as to why nations within intermediate missile range of Israel can NEVER have nukes. It is because Israel is Tel Aviv and one bomb over Tel Aviv and it's game over for Israel. Israel can strike back but the Islamic/Pan Arab radical enemies of Israel would be willing to absorb the hit thinking they have more centers of population from which to rise whereas Israel has but one.

So Bush people get your act together, craft a nuclear non proliferation doctrine and enforce it. Quit beating around the, nevermind. Put together a coherent set of reasons for rearranging the table in the ME.

[kinghorse]

Also please explain why the nuke is the ultimate terror weapon/intimidator, even greater than anthrax or chemicals. Most people understand getting whacked by bio or chemical is a roll of the dice. Honestly, even if West Nile was a terrorist inspired bio attack, look at how piss poor of a terror weapon it is. Few people have died and fewer people care.

Oh but if you live in a city and there is a nuke fear, fuggitaboutit. One nuke and we will have images f-o-r-e-v-e-r of the burned and disfigured, of the cancer wards and birth defects. It's the ultimate terror weapon.