Scott Ritter: A Tipping Point Toward Chaos

[eridani]

http://readersupportednews.org/opinion2/277-75/28470-focus-a-tipping-point-toward-chaos

There can be no doubt that what ISIS did was not an accident. Lieutenant Kasasbeh was killed on January 3, 2015 -- nearly a month before ISIS began "negotiating" a prisoner exchange involving the pilot and a would-be female suicide bomber. ISIS knew that by releasing the video of Kasasbeh's murder it would be guaranteeing the execution of its fellow Jihadists at the hands of the Jordanians.

The Islamic State also knew that the resulting public outrage in Jordan, especially amongst the influential al-Kasasbeh tribe, would push Jordan toward accepting a larger role in the fight against ISIS. And it also knows that, in assuming this role, the Jordanian King would be even further aligning himself with the United States and, indirectly, with a competing Shi'a alliance involving Iran, Iraq, Syria and Hezbollah.

Rather than serving as a tipping point for mobilizing public sentiment in the Sunni Arab world against ISIS, it seems that a case can be made that the actions of ISIS seem geared toward achieving the exact opposite reaction -- the mobilization of angry, disenfranchised Sunni Arab youth inside Jordan against the actions of their King, creating the kinds of social rifts ISIS thrives upon. Jordan should proceed cautiously before agreeing to any expansion of its role in the anti-ISIS coalition. To do otherwise, and surrender to an emotional call for revenge, may very well pull the Hashemite Kingdom into the same vortex of fundamentalist sectarianism that has torn Iraq and Syria apart. And this is exactly what ISIS wants.

[90-percent]

1. Nice to hear from Scott again!

He was ahead of the invade Iraq propaganda before the invasion.

And I think he got into some underage internet meet up entrapment trouble about ten years ago? Didn't he even spend some time in prison over that?

He still has a lot of cred with me for his expertise s a middle east weapons inspector.

-90% Jimmy

[msanthrope]

2. Scott was just released from jail for his fourth sex offense conviction....

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Scott-Ritter-paroled-in-online-sex-case-5936227.php

He is currently in outpatient sex offender treatment.

I ddon't know how you "entrap" someone into masturbating on camera...particularly when you've represented to them that they are conversing with a minor.

[leveymg]

53. More importantly, Scott was a conduit for Ahmed Chalabi's disinformation about Iraq WMDs.

That is really the most disqualifying thing that casts doubt on his credibility. Dug this up from an old post of mine on DU2: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=389&topic_id=3784928&mesg_id=3788665

The claim being made by the White House was that Saddam had "reconstituted his WMD programs". In order to verify that claim, which was the casus belli for the invasion of Iraq, coalition forces would have had to unearth evidence of a recent (post 1991) operational facilities for manufacturing chemical, biological or nuclear weapons.

Recall that at the conclusion of the Gulf War, as part of terms imposed by the Americans, Saddam ordered the Iraqi WMD program dismantled. That resulted in Saddam's "bonfire of the vanities", a mass destruction of equipment used to manufacture WMDs. This was observed and duly reported back to Washington, but kept classified because the details would have revealed the extent to which the Reagan-Bush Administrations had provided the WMD production infrastructure used by Iraq in its 1981-88 war against Iran.

After the defeat of George H.W. Bush in the election of 1992, rumours of Saddam's WMD program reemerged from several sources in the Middle East. This became a rallying cry to push the Clinton Administration to more actively intervene in Iraq, which continued providing support to the Palestinians, and as a way to undermine Clinton's peace talks. This culminated in the Iraq Liberation Act of 1998. The main co-sponsors in the Senate were Joe Lieberman and John McCain. The Act set aside up to $90 million for Iraqi regime change pursued by a group of exile groups led by Ahmed Chalabi's INC, and handed an intelligence gathering role to those same groups.

Back in the mid-1990s, the UN inspectors were perplexed as to why they were still receiving intelligence about such Iraqi programs, but could not find operating manufacturing plants or facilities. Some speculated that maybe Saddam had built mobile biowarfare labs, which were moved around, and thus avoided detection. The US even built "replica" biowarfare labs at Ft. Detrick, MD to demonstrate that anthrax could be produced in a trailer. The CIA/DIA/SAIC contractor in charge of that project was a South African named Steve Hatfill.

In 1997, a US weapons inspector met with an Iraqi exile group leader at his apartment in Paris. During that visit, the American brought up the theory that Saddam was making anthrax in mobile biowarfare labs. Some months later, an Iraqi defector emerged in Germany, claiming he had been part of Saddam's WMD program that had built underground laboratories and, you guessed it, anthrax production trailers. He was dubbed "Curveball" by his German hosts, passed on to the CIA, and the rest is history.

By the way, the American and the Iraqi who met in Paris were named, Scott Ritter and Ahmed Chalabi. See, http://www.newyorker.com/archive/2004/06/07/040607/fa_f...

[msanthrope]

62. Well, looks like Ritter had his hands in many dirty pies before he "turned."

The thing about Intelligence operatives.....people like Jeffrey Sterling, John Kiriakou, Snowden, Bob Woodward? They never stop playing the game. If their lips are moving, they are lying.

[leveymg]

63. I wouldn't include all the intelligence analysts on that list.

We won't agree about how you characterized Kiriakou or Snowden, so let's agree to disagree, and not even get into that.

[msanthrope]

3. Scott Ritter is currently in outpatient sex offender therapy, per his parole.

http://www.timesunion.com/local/article/Scott-Ritter-paroled-in-online-sex-case-5936227.php

I beg you to consider if this man is a fit source for anything.

[Octafish]

4. What if the government set him up?

You know, like the FBI does with all those domestic terrorists that turn out to be working for the FBI?

[msanthrope]

5. Four damn times? Twice before he ever spoke up about WMDs? Did they

use a time machine? Someone forced him to pull down his pants on camera? He got caught the fourth time in an online sting....which means that after three prior incidents, he was still trolling online. That doesn't speak to a person with reason and sense.

Look...a condition of his parole was admitting his offenses. It's time to give up the ghost here.....Scott Ritter has admitted he's a sex offender. He's in outpatient treatment for being a sex offender.....hell, he isn't allowed to be around minors without prior approval from his PO.

[randome]

7. Yeah, but...but...I got nothin'.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[Ruby the Liberal]

23. Your jury results

On Sun Feb 8, 2015, 07:53 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Yeah, but...but...I got nothin'.
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6196762

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

This does nothing to further discussion. Meant to silence. Not appropriate.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Feb 8, 2015, 08:04 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is an abuse of the jury system, there is nothing wrong with this post!
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Dumbest alert yet.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Could be but it doesn't appear to violate CS.

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[randome]

46. Wow. That's...that's...I got nothin'.

[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[Octafish]

10. Where were the FEDs when one of their own was using the Internet to troll for minors?

US Attorney John Atchison promised what he thought was the 5-year old girl's mother he wouldn' t hurt the child -- stating he'd done it before. In reality, he was corresponding with an undercover deputy in Michigan. He showed up at the airport with toys. Originally from Alabama, the guy was a riser in the Dixie GOP. Like so many of the evil ilk, after his arrest he tried suicide in jail, the second time successfully.

I wondered if Atchison was friends with Bob Riley, Mark Fuller and the rest of the Alabama Old GOP Boys? What turned up:

The Strange Tale of a Pedophile in the U.S. Justice Department

Legal Schnauzer, WEDNESDAY, SEPTEMBER 29, 2010

The U.S. Department of Justice generated plenty of strange stories during the George W. Bush years. But one of the strangest involved John David "Roy" Atchison, an assistant U.S. attorney in Pensacola, Florida, who committed suicide after being caught in a pedophilia sting in Detroit.

Atchison's sad story has many connections to Birmingham and Alabama. And it raises this question: How did a guy with a shaky work record and a history of run-ins with the law get hired by the world's supposedly foremost crime-fighting organization? Did Atchison attain his lofty position because he had connections to powerful figures in the Alabama legal world?

Investigative journalist Margie Burns examines these questions, and much more, in a series of posts about the Atchison case at her blog, margieburns.com.

Burns begins with the actions that turned Atchison into a national figure in fall 2007:

This is not the story of a man who engaged in pedophilia for years or decades before being caught. It is the story of a man whipsawed by the strain of living up to a high-achieving family rooted in Birmingham, Ala., whose high-functioning connections assisted him for years in developing a career for which he turned out not to be suited. On Sept. 16, 2007, Assistant U.S. Attorney John David Roy Atchison, serving as a federal prosecutor in the Northern District of Florida, was arrested on credible charges of basically pedophilia. Atchison committed suicide in federal prison Oct. 5.

A dead pedophile might not sound like a tragedy. But Atchison was thought to be participating in a pedophile ring, and his death removed a useful informant from law enforcement resources. The question of how he was enabled to kill himself rather than being preserved for justice is one of the loose ends left hanging in his case.

CONTINUED 'though I wish it didn't...

http://legalschnauzer.blogspot.com/2010/09/strange-tale-of-pedophile-in-us-justice.html

Margie Burns detailed how the guy rose up through the GOP ranks, warts and all.

When this is the kind of person putting people behind bars on behalf of Uncle Sam, a political associate of the right wing GOP, it makes it easier to understand how a whistleblower like Ritter -- one of the few in government to oppose Bush's Iraq WMD claims -- could be set up as a child predator. Others in government service to oppose the war were similarly endangered, Ambassador Joseph Wilson's wife Valerie Plame was exposed as a CIA undercover operative and State Department official John J. Kokal fell to his death from the State Department roof after voicing opposition to the war.

[Dreamer Tatum]

11. typical. nt

[Octafish]

15. Typical what, ignorance?

Did you know any of that, Dreamer Tatum? Did you know Atchison apparently received all sorts of preferential treatment in hiring?

http://www.margieburns.com/?s=roy+atchison

[Dreamer Tatum]

17. did you know that hasnt a fucking thing to do with Ritter?

I get it: redirection and obfuscation are how CTers wear down the weak. But I'm not buying. Show evidence that Ritter was set up, or with all due respect, STFU.

Know what else? Your methods on DU are pretty McCarthyesque.

[Octafish]

21. What's McCarthyesque are your smears, Dreamer Tatum.

As to what Atchison has to do with Ritter:

GOP promoted Atchison into US Attorney's office, even when he had been documented as a deadbeat. That demonstrates corruption.

As for Ritter, he stood up against the corrupt GOP leading the nation into an illegal, immoral and unnecessary war. That demonstrates intgrity.

I don't know if Ritter is a sexual predator. The same government who lied America into war found evidence saying he is.

PS: Your righteous indignation shows what you know, Dreamer Tatum, and that ain't much.

[Dreamer Tatum]

26. Sorry, but when you try to CT away things that are inconvenient to your narrative

and then blue-ink people to death who have the temerity to direct you to actual facts, that's McCarthyesque.

I'm sure that comes as a shock to you, since you probably fancy yourself as one who decries McCarthyism.

Even so.

[Octafish]

29. So, when you don't have anything to rebut with, your M.O. is to attack the messenger.

That is the sign of the disinformationist.

Me. I don't fancy myself anything. I know what I am. And I've posted blue-links since I started on DU1 as Oblomov so that anyone, whether DUer or asshole shitstain wanker, can learn more, as well as judge for him- or herself.

So, show where I've intentionally lied or presented information that was not true on DU. Go through my Journal on DU3 or DU2.

Show. It's why I bother to put in sources, so if I'm wrong, I can learn why. That's just me.

As for what you are, Dreamer Tatum? Best of luck to you. You're going to need it.

[Dreamer Tatum]

32. No, you're a little more artful than that. You attack the messenger's source and rebut with nonsense

You're right: you've been doing it unimpeded for years, and I am sure that some find it insightful and incisive.

I, on the other hand, am usually amused but occasionally annoyed when it appears that you are certain of the smell
of a 1938 Prescott Bush fart, but cannot fathom the guilt of Scott Ritter.

Mind you, if Ritter was a satellite of the "BFEE," I vouchsafe you would have no problem appropriating the very same information you currently discount to use against him.

[Octafish]

51. You sound mad -- angry, not crazy -- Dreamer Tatum.

I write about the BFEE because the Corporate Owned Media won't.

Bartcop coined the term "Bush Family Evil Empire" to denote the 60-year pre-eminence of one family in the formation of the political philosophy in the United States, that of the War Party. And, yes, personally, I have tried to chronicle their influence on the ascension of the national security state. At least three generations have held high national office, while also making big money off war and looting the public Treasury. The last president of the United States, a man who wasn't elected fair and square by any stretch of the imagination, actually said: "Money trumps peace" at a press conference. For some reason, not a single "journalist" had the guts to ask him what he meant by that.

That may not seem like much to a DUer or to an asshole shitstain wanker, seeing how the NSA spies on everybody, that's doing a bit more than most.

[FarPoint]

84. Thanks for speaking up and setting the record straight.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

24. The review was completed at Sun Feb 8, 2015, 11:05 AM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Octafish is a CT theorist. And an annoying one at that.
Juror #2 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Beyond what the alerter said, this is a pretty-clear PA.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: This is rude, but we're all supposed to be adults here. Don't agree with this comment and the way it's said is disagreeable, but it's not a rules violation, IMHO.
Juror #5 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

[Octafish]

55. Dear Juror #1

Feel free to disagree with me any time you want. If you can, post "Why" so I can learn why you think or feel that way.

As for me: I try to let the readers weigh and decide for themselves. I often post information that one doesn't find on ABCNNBCBSCIAFoxNoiseNutworks or The New York Times. They're the "respected sources" who told you Lee Harvey Oswald killed President Kennedy, North Vietnam attacked the United States Navy in the Gulf of Tonkin, Iraq had WMDs and was going to send them any day toward Washington. You see, I remember the times they did that, 1963, 1964 and, for Iraq twice, 1991 and 2002.

Wanting to share what I know and learn what others know is democratic. It's why the press is the only business mentioned by name in the Constitution. It's why the press is so important for safeguarding the republic and maintaining justice.

Wanting to share and learn is the exact opposite to your approach, where you and others on DU, including the rightwing lurkers and the asshole shitstain wankers, label me as a "CT theorist" in order to denigrate me as a poster and demean anything I post. That's a form of censorship, which is undemocratic.

[SidDithers]

86. +1...nt

Sid

[msanthrope]

12. And this exonerates Ritter, how? Did someone use a time machine to go

forward to 2009, to the latest arrest?

[Octafish]

14. It's not meant to exonerate anyone. It shows how corrupt the government is.

When GOP connected sexual predators can get jobs in the Department of Justice, there's a problem for We the People.

While I don't know if Scott Ritter is a sexual predator, he did stand up in opposition to the GOP and the rest of the government when they lied America into war in Iraq.

[Dreamer Tatum]

18. Actually you do know he's a predator.

Because he said so.

[Octafish]

22. Link? Or is it one of those things, "Take my word on it."

This guy said all sorts of things, including "his" plan to unleash a dirty nuke, after what the torturers got through with him:



The guy who helped run that show now runs FBI. Small world, huh, Dreamer Tatum?

[msanthrope]

41. It's a condition of parole, Octa. You admit to your crime. It's also a condition of being in an

outpatient psychiatric sex offender program---you have to admit what you are.

[hughee99]

43. How do you know "they" didn't MAKE him say that?

[Go Vols]

57. results

AUTOMATED MESSAGE: Results of your Jury Service

Mail Message
On Sun Feb 8, 2015, 11:18 AM an alert was sent on the following post:

Where were the FEDs when one of their own was using the Internet to troll for minors?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1002&pid=6196809

REASON FOR ALERT

This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.

ALERTER'S COMMENTS

Pathetic attempts to excuse a child sex offender is beyond the pale at DU. Just NO.

You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sun Feb 8, 2015, 11:59 AM, and the Jury voted 0-7 to LEAVE IT.

Juror #1 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Seems to fit right into this conversation.
Juror #3 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: FEH
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: Leaving it alone, but this is also a baseless conspiracy theory.
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given

Thank you very much for participating in our Jury system, and we hope you will be able to participate again in the future.

[Jackpine Radical]

50. I have no opinion about Ritter's actions, but i do know something about

the justice system as it relates to sex offenders. Note this--"a condition of his parole was admitting his offenses." In other words, if he actually were innocent, the only way to get parole was to admit to offenses he did not commit.

This is not a new thing. In one rather interesting case I reviewed a few years ago, the offender was in sex offender treatment, still locked up for many rears after he had served out the original term of his sentence. One thing I discovered in his records is that, early in his treatment, he was getting "good" polygraph results concerning his disclosure of victims, but over time, as his treatment progressed, his polygraph results got worse & worse, so the staff kept pushing him for more victim disclosures, but even as he was disclosing more victims, his polygraph readings stayed in the Deceptive range. He disclosed over 40 victims. The polygraph started going "bad" when he moved beyond confessing to his original 3 victims.

An informed look at the data from the federal sex offender program at Butner, NC suggests that this is a pretty common event, that offenders are pushed to confess to many more victims than they actually had. Here are some relevant comments from a review by my colleague Dr. Richard Wollert of the situation at Butner:

My colleagues and I criticized the Butner Studies because they included the types of flaws listed in Table 2. One very troubling feature was that the welfare of Hernandez’ “subjects” was dependent on their standing in his program. From interviewing or counseling CPOs who had been at Butner we learned they were fearful of program termination. If this happened they would be moved to the general prisoner population, where they would be harassed as sex offenders. Another problem was that Hernandez could define a sex offense anyway he wanted. He could, for example, count a dating relationship between a college freshman and a high school junior as an offense. It was also impossible to verify the accuracy of reports because CPOs were told not to identify victims and consent forms promised confidentiality. Still another problem that several Butner patients revealed to us was that staff members expected them to disclose new offenses on an ongoing basis. One former patient, for example, spontaneously wrote a letter to me (C.S., personal communication, September 6, 2010) stating that “when I got into the SOTP program I was instructed to count all incidents of sexual contact regardless of my age or the age of my ‘victim’”. Another was required to complete three PHQs within the span of a year. Finally, Butner patients were also expected to pass the full disclosure polygraph that Bourke and Hernandez (2009) described in the “Measures” section of their paper (p. 186). This holds significant implications for a study based on self-report data because a technique that is widely used to pass this exam entails “overestimating the number of possible victims” (Abrams, 1991, p. 259).
We also described how these circumstances interacted with one another to artifactually produce Hernandez’ results. This explanation relied heavily on the fact that subjects in psychological experiments will act the way a researcher wants them to act if they know what the researcher hopes to find. Aspects of the research situation that tip subjects off to these hopes are referred to as “demand characteristics” (Orne, 1962; Fillenbaum, 1966). In the Butner research, it was a simple matter for offenders in treatment to figure out what Hernandez wanted from them. This “demand” was reinforced by polygraph examinations and repeated PHQ administrations accompanied by an awareness that those who were terminated would be placed in the general population. Overdisclosure was also encouraged by the adoption of data collection procedures that made it impossible to verify the accuracy of disclosures.

[msanthrope]

65. If I thought Ritter were actually innocent, I'd be concerned. But I tend to think

actually innocent people do not web troll looking for an underage girl after three run ins with the law.

I agree with many of the critques Wollert made, by the way. Neither the criminal justice system, nor the practice of psychiatry deals particularly well with sex offenders.

[Jackpine Radical]

67. I'm concerned about the process, not about Ritter.

I have no special knowledge to bring, and no judgment to render.

I would submit, though, that the fact that one is a confirmed pedophile, terrible as that is, does not necessarily him unreliable in other aspects of his life. In psychodynamic terms, many pedophiles tend to live otherwise respectable and prosocial lives. They tend to be on the opposite pole from psychopaths on most dimensions of personality (introverted, shy, problems with social connections, often overly conscientious in certain areas, etc.). I'm talking extrafamilial pedophiles here, not incest perpetrators or those who prey upon post-pubescent children. Both of these groups are typically psychologically quite distinct from pedophiles.

I also need to make clear that I am in no way excusing or minimizing pedophilia; child molestation (which can, BTW, occur for many reasons other than pedophilia; only about half of those who molest pre-pubescent children meet diagnostic criteria for pedophilia) is absolutely the most destructive and harmful form of sexual abuse. People who do this deserve long prison sentences.

[msanthrope]

69. Oh--I am not disagreeing with your second paragraph.....just questioning the efficacy of using

Ritter on a message board such as this---frankly, do we need to go to the convicted sex offender to make our point?

I mean, if I wanted to, I could carry an assault rifle into Wal-Mart, legally. Does it mean I should? Is that how to make my point about gun control?

[Jackpine Radical]

71. In tactical terms, you're right, I'm sure.

To me the larger problem is that almost everyone has something in their past that can be used against them, or twisted into something, or, failing all else, can be framed--child porn planted on your hard drive? How hard would that be for the CIA?--to destroy their credibility. Remember what they did to Dan Rather, and how they used Hatfield's personal problems against him when he got too deeply into Bush's past.

Ultimately, we need to figure out how to separate the message from the messenger, I guess. Where possible, independent verification would be one such step.

[randome]

73. Except there is no message from Ritter.

ISIS is happy that we're trying to stop them? Of what possible use is this opinion? Does it mean we should stop trying to stop them? No. Does it mean we should keep trying to stop them? If so, again, what possible use is Ritter's opinion?

The information content of his article is nil.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]Precision and concision. That's the game.[/center][/font][hr]

[Jim Beard]

77. Yes they are

and that should make you think why? Who profits from a very bad image of IS from EVERYONE?

[randome]

78. Are you saying there is a good image of them that we're simply overlooking?

I'm saying it doesn't matter who profits. What matters is stopping them butchering people. Everything else is a sideshow.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]You have to play the game to find out why you're playing the game. -Existenz[/center][/font][hr]

[Jim Beard]

83. Even if its just as evil people?

Assad is known to bulldoze an entire town of people he wanted quitened from political discontent. Hama!

[UTUSN]

8. Totally agree with you. Back when, when we were desperate for voices against

the Shrub-CHEENEE horrors, we didn't need this tainted voice. I wonder about his compartmentalizing methods to allot to his different activities -- time for "this" and then time for Deep Political Commentary.

[msanthrope]

9. Well..I maintain that a man more interested in the cause than himself might

have kept to the background, knowing that his arrests would come to light.

He didn't....but that's hubris for ya'.

[UTUSN]

13. Yip, it opens up a rational trail of speculation:

* (your) somebody "more interested in the cause" would subordinate his public footprint (somebody else without the baggage would fill the slot).

* (your) "hubris" - one possibility.

* somebody so smart would be expected to anticipate (your) "his arrests would come to light."

* Another speculation, might somebody with uncontrollable tendencies in one area be similarly uncontrolling of his other interests (e.g., public political opinions) -- different motivation than hubris.

* Or, might he be a double agent, wanting to do harm to the cause with his taint. Even if some here theorize he might have been set up?

I don't know him, and don't want to.

[msanthrope]

45. Hubris--there's an endless supply of it. nt

[Jackpine Radical]

68. In that regard, it parallels stupidity.

Maybe that's why everything seems to run on hubris and stupidity (with fossil fuels being nothing more than an intervening variable)..

[Spider Jerusalem]

20. He's probably a fit source for commentary on the Middle East.

Sy Hersh said "he knows the Middle East like few Westerners I've ever met". Considering that it's an area he has expertise in, his views are probably worth consideration. (The same way I might listen to what Roman Polanski or Woody Allen had to say about filmmaking but would never leave either alone with my daughter if I had one.)

[msanthrope]

47. Maybe. And David Duke may have a really great blueberry pie recipe. Thing is, there's

other ME experts, so I don't have to go to the convicted sex offender.

And I can ask C&B for a pie recipe.

[eridani]

88. That does not wipe his brain of info about the Middle East n/t

[msanthrope]

89. You find an ME expert who isn't a sex offender? Can't you see the problem here? nt

[randome]

6. And Ritter is now an expert on ISIS because...:shrug:?

How about we stop with the defeatist whining of "that's just what they want you to think!" and get going and wipe these monsters off the face of the Earth?
[hr][font color="blue"][center]A ton of bricks, a ton of feathers, it's still gonna hurt.[/center][/font][hr]

[greatauntoftriplets]

19. He had time to study up on it while in the slammer!

[ND-Dem]

35. more expert than you, i'd guess.

Then in May 1984 he was commissioned as an intelligence officer in the United States Marine Corps. He served in this capacity for about 12 years.[2]

He served as the lead analyst for the Marine Corps Rapid Deployment Force concerning the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan and the Iran–Iraq War.

[4] During Desert Storm, he served as a ballistic missile advisor to General Norman Schwarzkopf.

Ritter "ran intelligence operations for the United Nations"[6] from 1991 to 1998 as a United Nations weapons inspector in Iraq in the United Nations Special Commission (UNSCOM), which was charged with finding and destroying all weapons of mass destruction and WMD-related manufacturing capabilities in Iraq. He was chief inspector in fourteen of the more than thirty inspection missions in which he participated.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Scott_Ritter

[randome]

48. Well, ISIS didn't exist back then but sure, he may be privy to information I would not.

I still say it doesn't matter what ISIS wants since they fail to articulate anything other than "Kill! Kill!" They need to be stopped.
[hr][font color="blue"][center]TECT in the name of the Representative approves of this post.[/center][/font][hr]

[marmar]

16. k/r

Welcome to Character-Assasination-to-Deflect-from-the-Larger-Point Underground !!!

[tabasco]

27. Character assassination of a convicted sex offender?

That's a laugh.

[marmar]

28. Fine. What does it have to do with ISIS?

[tabasco]

31. You're the one that brought up the issue of Ritter's character

Why don't you tell us?

[marmar]

34. So in other words, you don't have an answer.

[tabasco]

72. Actually, it seems you do not, so allow me to assist:

Persons with reprehensible moral character, who have exhibited extremely poor judgment on multiple occasions, are stupid.

People who cite the statements of stupid people, as though they are wise, are stupid too.

HOPE IT HELPS!

[elias49]

30. Just horrible what he was tricked into...oops..I mean what he did.

An internet chat sting. Same kind of thing they tried with Assange...

[Dreamer Tatum]

33. ...

http://www.nytimes.com/2012/02/26/magazine/scott-ritter.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

[msanthrope]

40. Who tried what with Assange? nt

[SidDithers]

87. ...

Sid

[Autumn]

25. He is so right on this.

Rec

[trumad]

36. There are many experts on the subject that I can turn to.

A dude who searches the Internet for under aged kids isn't one of them. I dont abide with sick fuckers and Ritter can go fuck himself.

Oh and those of you who think the Gov. set him up...you're idiots.

[JEB]

38. Another expert.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10026192982

[Octafish]

52. Because the government never sets anybody up.

Other than Don Siegelman. OK, and maybe Valerie Plame and her no-good husband Joseph Wilson. And maybe that buck naked buck private Chelsea Manning...

[trumad]

54. stop it.

You are embarrassing yourself.

[Octafish]

56. For pointing out the government lies?

What's embarrassing is telling other DUers what to post or not to post.

[trumad]

58. Just trying to help.

You trying to tell DUers a convicted sexual predator was set up by the Gov.... needs a strong rebuttal.

Hey if you want to defend a Sexual predator...have at it.

[Octafish]

59. So, guilt by association, rather than what I wrote.

Got it.

[elias49]

61. Meh. Pointless to argue with one who is

tru mad.

Haha! I did a funny. Now to get the snoblower out.

[trumad]

70. No you didn't do a funny..

Rather lame in mho.

[JEB]

37. Ritter was right on WMD's and right on this.

[trumad]

39. so fucking what...

So was Will Pitt...so was I back in the day...and probably so were you.

Did you masterbait on a Web chat in front of a 15 year old?

I don't think so.

[msanthrope]

42. Jeebus--it's like we're so starving for experts on the Middle East we have to go with the

convicted sex offender?

[JEB]

44. More interested in his take on ISIS than his "other activities".

Maybe Juan Cole is a "cleaner" expert.

http://www.juancole.com/2014/06/myths-radical-advance.html

[trumad]

49. Fuck that sick fuck and his opinion.

Maybe Juan Cole is "cleaner"?

Seriously did you just write that?

[elias49]

74. As a matter of fact Ritter didn't

"masterBAIT" in front of a 15-year-old, but truth doesn't matter. What's interesting is how you misspelled the word. Freudian slip? Because he was BAITED?

Ouch.

[trumad]

75. Your right...

He exposed himself in front of an undercover cop posing as a 15 year old.

Look...defend a child predator all you want....but God Damn...Ick!

[elias49]

76. I just wanted you to correct your misinformation.

Thank you.

[trumad]

79. The only mistake I made was...

Saying it was an actual 15 year old girl.

Ritter certainly thought the girl was 15---not knowing it was an undercover detective--- and then proceeded to jack off in front of the webcam.

Like I said. ...you defending a child predator is pretty icky.

[elias49]

80. Key mistake old chap. nt

[trumad]

81. ok...

So you agree with my corrected version? He did in fact get caught doing this?

[Lint Head]

60. It is not complicated. Fuck ISIS. Destroy every atom of

their existence.

[elias49]

64. Scott Ritter right again.

But it may be that he has boxes in his garage


Kick this OP for truth.

[msanthrope]

66. Why would you compare Snowden to a convicted sex offender? I'm a bit puzzled by your choice of

comparison here.

[bluestateguy]

82. Scott Ritter?

Maybe we can also solicit opinions from Bernie Ward?

[90-percent]

85. How come nobody mentioned the concept of rehabilitation?

We've got a prison industrial complex and the most incarcerated population on the planet, far exceeding any totalitarian fascist police state currently in existence.

We seem to be really enthusiastic as a nation about mass incarceration and getting tough on crime because we're all so afraid of everything. Which has been proven not to work and in toto is medieval in it's cruelty and harm to human lives.

I recall from my 70's high school and college education, I think it was sociology or philosophy or social problems, that there was a time in America where prisons made an effort to rehabilitate people, that is, make them capable of being a productive member of society. And even if no rehabilitation, isn't time served enough punishment, instead of being persecuted and a second class citizen with less rights than the rest of us for the rest of his life?

I think that Scott exercised some very bad judgment and underage children are off limits absolutely, but, he did his time and he's gotten therapy and I hope he's got good tools to cope with his demons. And he really knew his stuff about Iraq before the 2003 invasion and I had lot of respect for his information.

An analogy, on I think the Elizabeth Warren Facebook page, Ted Nugent came up. I know what a creepy conservative the guy is, threatening to kill the President multiple times and all, but I mentioned I really like Ted's guitar solo from Journey to the Center of Your Mind from around 1967. People were offended that I could like the music created by such a monster. Well, I have about three decades of really liking that song before I found out what a creep he is. And I think I found out in the 90's. Some rock mags covered his appetite for underage girls and other sleazy stuff he did. married a few 17 years olds i think and a serial monogamist. Can't I know Ted's a loathsome person but still like that guitar solo?

And because the arrests happened after he was so vocal about no WMD's, it was a great opportunity for our government to practice some SELECTIVE ENFORCEMENT on his ass. I mean, we've got mountains of laws. If our government chooses to ruin our lives, they could do it for most of us. But, for some of us, they would have to manufacture evidence or engage in some form of entrapment. I can imagine something of the sort happening to me. They'd find out what bar i like, make friends with me, and the get me in on some criminal easy money conspiracy? I'm scared to death about any encounter with our justice system, so I'd resist the temptation, I HOPE.

I don't know, did Scott ever have an encounter online with a real underage girl?

I've seen so many journalists and public figures attacked on DU, and it's ramped up noticeably in recent times. Chris Hedges, a lot of Glenn Greenwald, Robert Parry, Will Pitt, Noam Chomsky, Bill Maher, and many others that don't come to mind. So, is there a "Approved by DU" list of journalists and public figures where the consensus is that their information is unimpeachable and perfect always? Would Thom Hartmann possibly be one all of DU agrees is largely credible? Actually, there's DU posters I would also put in that category. Octa-fish, for one of many. He's a bona-fide BFEE ombudsman!


-90% Jimmy