The Other Scott Ritterhttp://www.OrbusMax.com
Most of us know who Scott Ritter is. The ex-United Nations weapons inspector from the 1990’s has been one of President Bush’s staunchest critics regarding the impending battle with Iraq. A hero of the anti-war crowd, Mr. Ritter pulls no punches in his views. In fact, during a speech this past week in New York, Ritter said the biggest enemy to democracy was not Iraq or al-Qaida – it was President Bush. "There is no other nation that is even close”, claims Ritter, in a
Feb. 14, 2003 article in the Albany Times-Union. The soon to be liberated people of Iraq might take issue with that statement, given the past 2+ decades of their current leadership.
Scott Ritter has not been a weapons inspector for over 4 years. He has admitted he does not know what weapons of mass destruction (WMD) Iraq may or may not have. He has not been in the intelligence loop for that same period of time (some would argue even longer than that – gratuitous cheap shot requirement fulfilled by the writer). In short, Scott Ritter expects people to believe what he says, based on the facts, as he knew them 4 1/2 years ago.
So why has little been said of another ex-weapons inspector, Bill Tierney? Tierney was an intelligence ‘targeting’ analyst at Central Command headquarters, and worked with UNSCOM in Iraq about the same time as Ritter. His credentials and background are as impressive as that of Ritter’s - and he comes to a much different conclusion: Tierney believes Iraq, at the very least,
has facilities to produce components for nuclear weapons, right now. Like Ritter, he has no hard proof, but he does take evidence and facts as they are now, and has reasoned there is a hidden uranium enriching processing facility near the Tigris River.
Is Tierney right and Ritter wrong, or vice-versa? To be honest I truly don’t know. But when I hear Scott Ritter make statements like he did Thursday night about President Bush, and when I hear Bill Tierney spend two hours on a talk show laying out a reasonable argument that concludes Saddam Hussein is developing a nuclear WMD, like most people I want to hear less of the irrational rhetoric and more of what may be considered probable.
But there’s another aspect to this that is troubling and somewhat frightening. The current weapons inspection team claims they can’t find evidence of WMD in the nearly 3 months of hunting. Of course, the fact that much of the cache is missing and can’t be accounted for ‘proves inspections are working’. Right, and 2+2=5 as well. So how is it despite the dozens, if not hundreds, of inspectors combing Iraq looking for weapons ‘officially banned by Saddam Hussein’, nothing is turned up (nothing being a dozen empty chemical warheads and a ballistic missile that violates the range allowed under U.N. regulations - but remember, it’s the new math). Yet, an ex-weapons inspector on his own, without the vast resources of the U.N. or current intelligence, concludes that yes Virginia, there is actually a nuclear weapons plant in Iraq? To put it bluntly, and referring specifically to the inspection bureaucracy as opposed to the inspectors themselves – does the U.N. actually WANT to find these weapons in the first place?
The obvious answer might be that since he’s not part of the current inspection team, Bill Tierney is not credible, and therefore the whole line of reasoning falls apart. And though the facts appear more and more compelling, at this point it’s a theory – at least, to those of us out of the intelligence loop. But if that’s true, then what explains the credibility of Scott Ritter? How is it the anti-war crowd has developed much of it’s reasoning along the same lines, based on the assertions of one man who also has been out of the loop and not privilege to current classified intelligence for almost 5 years?
What it comes down to is who and what you believe - and what are the outcomes for that belief; and even if not a belief, then at least who you are willing to listen to. As talk show host Sean Hannity has said many times on radio and TV, if Bill Tierney and those of us who believe that Iraq is hiding WMD are wrong, the downside is Saddam Hussein being removed from power and the people of Iraq experiencing something they have not had in over 2 decades – freedom and liberty. But if Scott Ritter, and those who believe Iraq is ‘contained’ and should be left alone to the inabilities of the U.N., are wrong, the downside is in all likelihood catastrophe.
Some have said that given it’s course of action, one day the United Nations will become an irrelevant body, due to inability or unwillingness to follow up on its own declarations and resolutions. Based on the recent statements of Scott Ritter and Bill Tierney, and the reaction and/or inaction that will follow, that day of irrelevancy may be getting a lot closer.
