Dismiss Notice

Psst... Ready to join TalkBass and start posting, make new friends, sell your gear, and more?  Register your free account in 30 seconds.

Wow! Is this Scott Ritter before he was bribed??

Discussion in 'Off Topic [BG]' started by DigMe, Feb 6, 2003.


  1. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    Man after reading the interview the interview at the following link:

    http://www.casi.org.uk/discuss/1998/msg00337.html

    I've gotta wonder what happened to Scott Ritter. Was he bribed?? Many claim that he accepted $400,000.00 from an Iraqi-American businessman to create that film on why America shouldn't go to war with Iraq. Ritter says he profited nothing from that. I really, really just have to wonder though. In this interview he basically says that the only option is force. What happened since then though? Really just makes you ask.

    Quote from Ritter's 1998 interview:
    "There is
    no doubt in any body's mind that Iraq is not in compliance."

    We go from that to today's declaration by Ritter that Colin Powell is lying!! And the 1998 quote was referring to even less stringent sanctions.

    And here's the most damning stuff:


    I wonder whatever happened to the VX gas that Ritter claimed clear proof of too? That's some scary stuff!

    Man, if there ever was a conspiracy theory then this is it...what the heck caused Ritter to do such an extreme 180 degree turn? The interview is a bit long but a compelling read. Check it out.

    brad cook
     
  2. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    *bump*

    Anyone else here think this is strange? Anyone??

    Does anyone have further info?

    brad cook
     
  3. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    Well this isn't really directed at people from any certain country and I don't really want to start a flamewar here either. I was actually just wondering if maybe most people don't know who Scott Ritter is. That might explain lack of responses. Could be I guess although you couldn't miss him if you watched any news shows for a while there. I think he's pretty well known in the UK too but I might be wrong.

    At any rate I wasn't really asking people to "defend" Ritter as there really isn't any defense if you look at this interview alongside his current stance. I just want to know if anyone has any other info or opinions as to what has happened here to cause such a straightup contradiction to his former opinion based on his factual findings in Iraq.

    brad cook

    EDIT: Ok maybe I shouldn't say that there isn't "any defense." I mean there's always insanity right...which is certainly possible in this case.
     
  4. David Watts

    David Watts

    Aug 12, 2002
    seattle
    I find this comment offensive and unbecoming someone who is supposed to be policing threads. What makes this different from trollspeak?
     
  5. Brooks

    Brooks

    Apr 4, 2000
    Middle East
    I was going to post a response, but the tone of the original post kept me away.
     
  6. JMX

    JMX Vorsprung durch Technik

    Sep 4, 2000
    Cologne, Germany
    Watch it pal. :mad:

    I expect better from a moderator.

    People in Europe don't buy Bush's and Blair's war mongering because of stuff like this:

    http://www.cnn.com/2003/WORLD/meast/02/07/sprj.irq.uk.dossier/index.html

    Which is, interestingly enough, buried very deeply into CNN's website. Not pro-government enough for a frontpage?

    Also, Rumsfeld's arguments are getting weaker by the minute, or why else does he go back to insulting everyone who has a different opinion?
     
  7. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    What an honor it must be for you that all the "people of Europe" have entrusted you with the responsibility of being their spokesman.

    Barring any opinions on the statements of Rumsfield, Bush, Blair or Mickey Mouse, what about the statements by Ritter in the interview that this thread is about?

    brad cook
     
  8. I could hear the high-pitched whining noise from Deutschland all the way in upstate NY after Rummy made his "Cuba, Libya, and Germany" remark.
     
  9. JMX

    JMX Vorsprung durch Technik

    Sep 4, 2000
    Cologne, Germany
    digme, I'm glad you decided to be Hambone's spokesman...

    I said people in Europe, not "people of Europe" - I meant [most] people in Europe of course - happy now?

    Still, Hambone's remark was clearly offensive, and obviously directed at [all, most, etc.] Europeans ["overseas friends"], and I'm a European.

    :rolleyes:
     
  10. David Watts

    David Watts

    Aug 12, 2002
    seattle
    I don't know what Ritter's deal is, but isn't his flippy flop akin to Colin Powell's? Powell is hellbent on war now, but, to my recollection, months ago he was not. I'm not trying to make excuses for Ritter, or condemn Mr. Powell, but the context of the statements could possibly provide further clarification for both of their statements.
     
  11. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    I don't recall speaking for nor defending Hambone's statement. I felt it was a bit trollish myself and I made NO references to that at all, which begs the question - "what the hell are you talking about?"

    Forgive me for misquoting you. I was addressing your statement which made it sound (IMO) as if all of the people in Europe can be spoken for with one broad statement. I've heard too many statements like that in these conversations (not just this thread) and I just wanted to point out that both America and Germany (along with most other countries) have many people that are against and many people that are for attacking Iraq as a result of their disregard for the sanctions. At last count there were at least 18 European countries (including eastern Europe) that are officially backing the US in it's stance against Iraq. All of those countries have citizens that are for and against.

    So anyway..back to the subject at hand. How do you address the statements by former weapons inspector Scott Ritter regarding Iraq's blatant disregard of UN sanctions?

    brad cook
     
  12. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    I believe that Powell's change has been more of a "let's wait and see" from a few months ago to the current "I've seen. Now it's time to act." That's just how it's looked to me. I may be wrong.

    Whereas Ritter's thing is he went from "Iraq represents a clear and present danger. It's undeniable that they still have VX gas that was put into warheads. I've seen this first hand. The only way to stop them is to invade and take out Saddam." (of course that's a paraphrase despite the quotes...I'm sorta imagining how he might have summarized the aforementioned interview at the time) to basically saying that every bit of evidence that Powell or Bush has admitted as evidence of Iraq breaking sanctions is a lie and we have no basis for attacking. He literally said "Colin Powell is lying." That just seems really bizarre to me. That represents a much greater issue than Colin Powell's change of attitude, which is easily explainable. I also feel that the Ritter interview is thorough enough to establish context.

    brad cook
     
  13. David Watts

    David Watts

    Aug 12, 2002
    seattle
    Brad - I think you are right in your comparison of Powell and Ritter's statements. In a way, it makes Ritter's statements seem all the more bizarre. Almost seems like he is milking the current 15 minutes for all they are worth. I'd love to hear what he has to say about the contradiction.
     
  14. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    Me too! When I was trying to dig up some kind of info to explain this weirdness I did come across one short interview. It didn't explain it but it does refer to it. The interview is here:

    http://www.time.com/time/nation/article/0,8599,351165,00.html

    As usual, Time articles seem to take a while to load on my computer. Maybe that's just the dialup thing.

    The interviewer said "In 1998, you said Saddam had "not nearly disarmed." Now you say he doesn't have weapons of mass destruction (WMD). Why did you change your mind?" That question pretty much let Ritter off the hook. He should have asked about Ritter's comments that Iraq represents a clear and present danger and that the UN, lead by US forces, should invade Iraq and take out Saddam.

    That was really the only interview that I personally found in which Ritter is even remotely questioned about his turnaround.

    Maybe the reason that no one has questioned him further is found in his answer to one of the other questions in the Time interview:

    Who knows...maybe reporters are scared that if they ask those questions Ritter will use them in his exercise video.

    brad cook
     
  15. so...pardon my ignorance, who is scott ritter?


    whoever he is, definatly sounds fishy to me.
     
  16. DigMe

    DigMe

    Aug 10, 2002
    Waco, TX
    Former chief UN weapons inspector in Iraq for many years. Now one of the most outspoken opponents of war against Iraq and of the Bush administration's handling of the Iraq issue. Called Colin Powell's statements to the UN last week lies. After making the claims about Iraq that are found in the interview that is the subject of this thread, he then started saying about a year later that Iraq is a threat to no one and that military action is not the answer.

    brad cook