The following is an archived copy of a message sent to a Discussion List run by the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

Views expressed in this archived message are those of the author, not of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.

[Main archive index/search] [List information] [Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [casi] The inconsistency of Scott Ritter


With all respect for Tom Nagy's views, I have to agree with Eric Herring.

The issue is not "muddying the water" in as much as being and sounding
credible as many have stressed on this list. We have been reminded time and again
that what we say and post must be correct and consistent.
Scott Ritter has not been consistent.
If he was able to change his mind once, what is to stop him from changing his
mind again and again? Would we still quote Ritter if he goes back to what he was?

If we remember well, it was Ritter who created the crisis of the Presidential
Palaces, when he insisted on entering them. He gave the US administration the
justifications it needed (flimsy as they were) to attack Iraq later that year. His
resignation was not due to any awakening or humanitarian concern for the Iraqis:
on the contrary, his criticism of the US administration was because, in his
opinion, it wasn't doing enough against Iraq. He thought it was being too soft on
Iraq, and he wanted it to use force…

For seven years, he continued to carry out the work for the US army
intelligence (disguised as a UN official), spying on Iraq for the US and for a
foreign state (Israel), like he himself later admitted.

Why didn't Ritter, working for the UN, express his opposition to Butler's
policies while he was still working for UNSCOM? If he dared oppose the US
administration, couldn't he have opposed his UN boss, and gone directly to the UN
Secretary General or the Press to expose what was being done???
At that time, Ritter gave Ekeus and then Butler reports that Iraq was not in
100% compliance and he wanted 100% disarmament. Why didn't Ritter then talk of
qualitative disarmament versus quantitative disarmament? Was his conscience on

Questions that I have put even to Iraqi officials I met last April, and to
which no one had an answer..

So what happened between December 1998 and his awakening? Shakir Al Khafaji
happened, who gave Ritter 400 000 reasons to change his mind!!
Would Ritter change his mind again if he were given more reasons to do so by
someone else???

That is why I believe that someone like Ritter has lost his credibility with
me at least, and I do not quote him. I would rather use statements by Rolf Ekeus
and Kofi Annan on UNSCOM's spying activities to expose these issues than refer to

Sorry, but that is how I feel….


Chatting in Arabic is more fun with Maktoob Chat. So go and join the crowd!

Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq.
To unsubscribe, visit
To contact the list manager, email
All postings are archived on CASI's website:

[Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq Homepage]