Ritter has no credibility On September 3, 1998, Ritter testified before a Senate committee:
SEN. BROWNBACK: And yet you were stopped on two occasions. In your opinion, in the absence of a robust inspection regime, how quickly could Iraq restart its weapons of mass destruction program? MR. RITTER: Iraq has -- in my opinion, within a period of six months, simply put. Six months. SEN. BROWNBACK: Do you have any information as to whether they are continuing with it to even today? MR. RITTER: Yes, sir. SEN. BROWNBACK: You do? MR. RITTER: Yes, sir. SEN. BROWNBACK: What's your opinion about that continuation of their weapons-of-mass-destruction program today? MR. RITTER: They're -- Iraq has positioned itself today that once effective inspection regimes have been terminated, Iraq will be able to reconstitute the entirety of its former nuclear, chemical and ballistic missile delivery system capabilities within a period of six months. Six months. Again, remember that these statements were made four years ago. On August 25, 2002, Mr. Ritter was quoted on NBC's Meet The Press as saying, "Iraq has been disarmed fundamentally. Their weapons programs have been eliminated. Iraq poses no threat to any of its neighbors. It does not threaten its region. It does not threaten the United States. It does not threaten the world." In the four years since Ritter's resignation as a weapons inspector, there have been no inspections inside Iraq. How does Mr. Ritter know that what he said in 1998 is no longer true? How does he know that Iraq has been "disarmed fundamentally"? Which Scott Ritter are we to believe? Should we believe the Scott Ritter of 1998 that gave testimony under oath to the congress immediately following his gig as a weapons inspector? Or should we believe the Scott Ritter of today that is trying to sell a book? ----- Original Message ----- From: "Kevin Graeme" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "CF-Community" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 6:03 PM Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy > Not according to Scott Ritter and two interviews with other UNSCOM guys that > I've heard or read. Apparently, the type of chemical/biological weapons they > were making were extremely hard to store for long periods of time. From all > these interviews, the common thread is that the materials wouldn't last more > than two years even refridgerated. > > As for why we haven't been hearing about it, Ritter was talking about this > months and months ago, well before the inspectors went back in. I've noticed > a lot of things like this that the media has opted not to cover in favor of > "Countdown to War" or whatever to get ratings. He also mentioned that he has > close ties with the Israeli intelligence and that Israel keeps close tabs on > what materials are going in to Iraq that could potentially be used to > restart production. Other than a couple aluminum tubes, there apparently > hasn't been anything going in to restart production. At least those were his > comments. He did however support the inspectors going back in because Iraq > IS under sanctions. > > -Kevin > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Andre Turrettini [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 5:30 PM > > To: CF-Community > > Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy > > > > > > Dude! Most of those chemical weapons last forever! If they only lasted a > > year or two, nobody would stockpile them or even make them. > > > > DRE > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Andy Ousterhout [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 3:45 PM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy > > > > > > > > > One UNSCOM inspector does not an expert make. The shelf life > > > sounds very interesting. I wonder why that hasn't been > > > brought up anywhere yet? If true, you would think that > > > Saddam would have mentioned it... > > > > > > If you break up the word "expert", you get "ex - has been" > > > and "spert - drip under pressure". > > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Kevin Graeme [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > Sent: Tuesday, March 04, 2003 3:58 PM > > > To: CF-Community > > > Subject: RE: Personal Stance Change for Iraq Policy > > > > > > > > > > adios, so long, bye bye. He's hiding weapons, he can't produce > > > > evidence that he destroyed his WMD, > > > > > > Funny, I just heard an interview with yet another UNSCOM > > > inspector that said there was virtually no possibility in his > > > professional opinion that Iraq has any WMDs because what they > > > had didn't have a shelf-life past 2 years and they don't have > > > the manufacturing facilities to make more. > > > > > > Kinda hard to produce evidence of something if it doesn't > > > exist. Now the question is, do you believe Bush or do you > > > believe the experts? > > > > > > -Kevin > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~| Archives: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?forumid=5 Subscription: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/index.cfm?method=subscribe&forumid=5 This list and all House of Fusion resources hosted by CFHosting.com. The place for dependable ColdFusion Hosting. Unsubscribe: http://www.houseoffusion.com/cf_lists/unsubscribe.cfm?user=89.70.5
