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]
>Scott's always been difficult for some in the US peace movement to swallow as he is not a pacifist. Concerning Iraq, though, he has been steadfast against the war, has bemoaned in many public settings the horrendous effects of sanctions, he calls for the soldiers to come home .... he's great on Iraq.> The problem is not that Scott Ritter is not a pacifist. The problem is that Ritter suffers from lack of credibility. To begin with, Scott Ritter's record in Iraq has been one of creating problems with the Iraqis and accusing them of obstructing his work. At no time during his years of work for the CIA via UNSCOM, did Ritter utter any criticism of the sanctions or state that Iraq was rid of its WMDs. On the contrary, he kept accusing Iraq of hiding its weapons programs, and we remember his many confrontations with the Iraqis. During that time, he also gave intelligence information on Iraq to the Israelis and God knows who else... Ritter's resignation in 1998 was not because of any moral stand against sanctions or his condemnation of the suffering of Iraqis. He resigned because he believed the US administration was not doing enough on Iraq. He wanted it to tougher.. His about-turn was surprising, to say the least. He later came out telling us how UNSCOM was used for spying; how Iraq was "qualitatively" disarmed; how he opposed war.. He also made a film and wrote a book, allegedly with sponsoring from Shakir al-Khafaji, and Iraqi businessman from Detroit, who is suspected of working for the Iraqi regime!! And so when one now tries to use Ritter's statements tp prove that Iraq has been disarmed, people would tell you that until his resignation he wanted stronger action against Iraq; why would they believe a person who changes sides for money?? How does one counter those accusations and prove that Ritter was wrong then and is right now?? Personally, I don't have much respect for Ritter. Had he spoken out at any time during his work for UNSCOM against sanctions and inspections, I would have had the greatest respect for him. Right now, he is in the same league as Annan, Ekeus, Blix, Elbaradei, Kelly, Thielman, Wilson and all those who knew but kept quiet.. Because of their cowardice and lack of integrity; their inability to speak out the truth; and their fear for losing their jobs, tens of thousands of Iraqis died. Only now, they come out and speak, when it is too late and the damage is done. As an Iraqi, I hold all of the above jointly with the administrations in the US and UK responsible for the continuation of sanctions and the deaths of Iraqis, and I believe they deserve to be judged as accomplices in a crime against humanity.. HZ __________________________________ Do you Yahoo!? SBC Yahoo! DSL - Now only $29.95 per month! http://sbc.yahoo.com _______________________________________________ Sent via the discussion list of the Campaign Against Sanctions on Iraq. To unsubscribe, visit http://lists.casi.org.uk/mailman/listinfo/casi-discuss To contact the list manager, email firstname.lastname@example.org All postings are archived on CASI's website: http://www.casi.org.uk