Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: dumbmoney who wrote (136051)	6/9/2004 1:56:06 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Respond to of 281500

He is responsible for his own views and activities, which are exemplary. If by "exemplary" you mean changing his story 180 degrees in the total absence of any new data whatsoever (the UN inspectors were not in Iraq), and in complete denial that he had ever changed his story, in the teeth of abundant evidence to the contrary, but in receipt of 100s of thousands of dollars from Saddam's pocket, then I would agree. However, this is not what is usually meant by "exemplary".

To: dumbmoney who wrote (136051)	6/9/2004 3:37:31 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Exactly how does this "get" Scott Ritter? Surely he is not responsible for the views and activities of the financier of his documentary. He is responsible for his own views and activities, which are exemplary. And you accuse the "neocons" of distraction? Ritter is HARDLY exemplary. His pedophile "activities" clearly demonstrate that he is hardly a credible witness with regard to character and integrity. And the fact that he married a Russian woman, who he ADMITS was hired by the KGB to spy on him further reflects a personal recklessness that cost him his security clearance. These guys have written a pretty concise history of Ritter's activities. Maybe you should read it: ropma.net Hawk