Comments on: Scott Ritter and Seymour Hersh on Iran

By: homeyra

homeyra — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 07:29:49 +0000

De rien PPGG, de rien :)
Rather ugly, isn’t it?
Over half a million dead, god knows what else, it all seems so irrelevant. Are we won little by little by a Nazi mentality?
It seems we are. I don’t know if you read Sophia analyzes about the future “talks”. Confirms the ugly side.

By: peoplesgeography

peoplesgeography — Sat, 03 Mar 2007 06:00:45 +0000

Thanks very much for that Homie. Ed puts it very well and the only thing I'd add is that the documentary Ritter made in 2000 (Shifting Sands: The Truth About UNSCOM and the Disarming of Iraq) was in part financed by a $400,000 contribution from Iraqi American businessman Shaker Al-Khaffaji. Accusations were levelled in a Washington Times article (which didn't hold up, obviously part of the smear campaign to try to discredit him that Ed describes) that Al-Khaffaji obtained the money from goods sold in the U.N. Oil-for-Food program in violation of U.N. sanctions. A similar defamation campaign related to Oil for Food was directed at Scottish MP George Galloway. cheers Ann

By: homeyra

homeyra — Fri, 02 Mar 2007 23:28:59 +0000

I also read about some controversies about Ritter. This is what Fanonite wrote about him:

“Well Ritter was famous for being extremely aggressive, and too close to the Israelis, during his stint as a UN Weapons inspector. He knows a lot about the Israeli connection, because he used to be a part of it, passing intelligence to Israelis in the early to mid 90s. As the years dragged on, however, he realized that the inspections were not meant to disarm Iraq. In fact, they were merely a cover for a policy of regime change. For that reason, the weapons inspectors efforts were all going to waste, since they could very easily certify Iraq as weapons free, however, they weren’t being allowed to go that far. That is when he resigned.

After the war, he made a documentary on Iraq and sanctions and latter became a vocal critic of US Iraq policy. The American right-wing, which initially loved him for his aggressive stance, turned against him at this point, and embarked on discrediting him. He was subjected to a really nasty smears and dirty tricks campaign.

Over all, I think he’s a very honest person with great integrity. He came to speak at an alternative summit we had organized to coincide with the G8 2005. As always, he was lucid and on the mark.”