Friday, September 13, 2002
Scott Ritter Interview
Scott Ritter interview Friday, September 13, 2002
David Asman, Fox News Channel
RITTER: No, first of all, I never said he has them [WMDs] and I'm not saying chances are he has them, I'm saying there's a possibility he could reconstitute this capability and that's why we have to have inspectors in place.
You can't go from the fact we can't confirm the final disposition of important elements of his program -- which is the case -- to suddenly giving Saddam Hussein massive strike capability that threatens the United States of America. You can't make that leap.
It is something you have to be concerned about. But the problem with what Bush is doing today is that he's made that leap, void of any intelligence information to substantiate that.
ASMAN: So he might still have all of those barrels of evil stuff, the biochemical weapons?
RITTER: It's not a matter of "still have," he might have been able to make those weapons in the intervening time.
ASMAN: But it's not void of actions, Mr. Ritter. It is particularly in light of what happened on September 11, 2001 and the fear that there are evil people out there, some of whom may have consorted with Saddam Hussein in the past, that would get together and use some of these chemical weapons -- if they're in Iraq -- on U.S. citizens.
RITTER: But this is a purely hypothetical situation. Show me where is the link.
ASMAN: September 11, 2001 was not hypothetical, nothing hypothetical at all.
RITTER: Don't disgrace the death of those 3,000 people by bringing Iraq into the equation.
David Asman, Fox News Channel
RITTER: No, first of all, I never said he has them [WMDs] and I'm not saying chances are he has them, I'm saying there's a possibility he could reconstitute this capability and that's why we have to have inspectors in place.
You can't go from the fact we can't confirm the final disposition of important elements of his program -- which is the case -- to suddenly giving Saddam Hussein massive strike capability that threatens the United States of America. You can't make that leap.
It is something you have to be concerned about. But the problem with what Bush is doing today is that he's made that leap, void of any intelligence information to substantiate that.
ASMAN: So he might still have all of those barrels of evil stuff, the biochemical weapons?
RITTER: It's not a matter of "still have," he might have been able to make those weapons in the intervening time.
ASMAN: But it's not void of actions, Mr. Ritter. It is particularly in light of what happened on September 11, 2001 and the fear that there are evil people out there, some of whom may have consorted with Saddam Hussein in the past, that would get together and use some of these chemical weapons -- if they're in Iraq -- on U.S. citizens.
RITTER: But this is a purely hypothetical situation. Show me where is the link.
ASMAN: September 11, 2001 was not hypothetical, nothing hypothetical at all.
RITTER: Don't disgrace the death of those 3,000 people by bringing Iraq into the equation.
Sunday, September 08, 2002
Ex-inspector Ritter says Iraq 'not a threat'
USA Today
9/8/2002
Ex-inspector Ritter says Iraq 'not a threat'
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Iraq is incapable of producing weapons of mass destruction and should prove it by allowing in U.N. weapons inspectors, an American who was once on the inspections teams said Sunday. With his comments during a visit to Baghdad, Scott Ritter — who has been a sharp critic of U.S. policy on Iraq — joined a long list of officials from European and Arab nations who have urged Iraq to accept inspectors to defuse a crisis with the United States.
Iraqi cooperation on inspections would leave the United States "standing alone in regards to war threats on Iraq and this is the best way to prevent the war," said Ritter.
Ritter, a former U.S. Marine intelligence officer, spoke to members of parliament and to journalists on his third trip to Iraq since he resigned from the U.N. inspection team in 1998. As in the past, his trip was organized by the Iraqi government. The rest of his schedule was not yet public.
"The truth is Iraq is not a threat to its neighbors and it is not acting in a manner which threatens anyone outside its borders," Ritter said. "Military action against Iraq cannot be justified."
Secretary of State Colin Powell disputed Ritter's comments on "Fox News Sunday," saying the remarks had came from "somebody who's not in the intelligence chain any longer."
"Why don't they (the Iraqis) say any time, any place, anywhere, bring them (the inspectors) in, everybody come in, we are clean?" Powell said. "The reason is, they're not clean. And we have to find out what they have and what we're going to do about it."
Iraq, while denying it has banned weapons, has offered only to continue dialogue with the United Nations about the return of inspectors. It has not responded to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's demand that inspectors be allowed to return unconditionally as a first step to further talks.
President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, meeting Saturday, insisted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is developing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and represents a threat that must be dealt with. The Bush administration is considering how to remove Saddam.
Other members of the U.N. teams that investigated Iraq's weapons of mass destruction from 1991 to 1998 have told The Associated Press that Iraq probably possesses large stockpiles of nerve agents, mustard gas and anthrax. They add that while the country does not have a nuclear bomb, it has the designs, equipment and expertise to build one quickly if it were able to get enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium.
A U.S. intelligence official said Saturday that Iraq has recently stepped up attempts to import industrial equipment that could be used to enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons.
Several equipment shipments destined for Iraq have been stopped in recent months, the official said, declining to say by whom or where. It is unclear whether any shipments got through. U.S. intelligence officials, however, do not believe Iraq has obtained any enriched uranium or plutonium.
Many former inspectors say Iraq's arsenal is not much of a threat because Saddam has been deterred so far by fear of U.S. retaliation and apparently has been reluctant to share his weapons with terrorists.
Ritter resigned from the U.N. inspection team in August 1998 after several years as a member. He left denouncing the Clinton administration for having withdrawn support for the U.N. agency and undermining weapons inspections.
He has since said Washington used the inspectors to spy on Iraq — a longtime charge by Baghdad — and manipulated the United Nations to provoke a confrontation with Saddam as a pretext for U.S. airstrikes on Iraq.
Months after Ritter's resignation, U.N. inspectors complaining of lack of cooperation from Iraq left the country ahead of U.S.-British strikes and they have been barred from returning since then.
9/8/2002
Ex-inspector Ritter says Iraq 'not a threat'
BAGHDAD, Iraq (AP) — Iraq is incapable of producing weapons of mass destruction and should prove it by allowing in U.N. weapons inspectors, an American who was once on the inspections teams said Sunday. With his comments during a visit to Baghdad, Scott Ritter — who has been a sharp critic of U.S. policy on Iraq — joined a long list of officials from European and Arab nations who have urged Iraq to accept inspectors to defuse a crisis with the United States.
Iraqi cooperation on inspections would leave the United States "standing alone in regards to war threats on Iraq and this is the best way to prevent the war," said Ritter.
Ritter, a former U.S. Marine intelligence officer, spoke to members of parliament and to journalists on his third trip to Iraq since he resigned from the U.N. inspection team in 1998. As in the past, his trip was organized by the Iraqi government. The rest of his schedule was not yet public.
"The truth is Iraq is not a threat to its neighbors and it is not acting in a manner which threatens anyone outside its borders," Ritter said. "Military action against Iraq cannot be justified."
Secretary of State Colin Powell disputed Ritter's comments on "Fox News Sunday," saying the remarks had came from "somebody who's not in the intelligence chain any longer."
"Why don't they (the Iraqis) say any time, any place, anywhere, bring them (the inspectors) in, everybody come in, we are clean?" Powell said. "The reason is, they're not clean. And we have to find out what they have and what we're going to do about it."
Iraq, while denying it has banned weapons, has offered only to continue dialogue with the United Nations about the return of inspectors. It has not responded to U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan's demand that inspectors be allowed to return unconditionally as a first step to further talks.
President Bush and British Prime Minister Tony Blair, meeting Saturday, insisted Iraqi leader Saddam Hussein is developing chemical, biological and nuclear weapons and represents a threat that must be dealt with. The Bush administration is considering how to remove Saddam.
Other members of the U.N. teams that investigated Iraq's weapons of mass destruction from 1991 to 1998 have told The Associated Press that Iraq probably possesses large stockpiles of nerve agents, mustard gas and anthrax. They add that while the country does not have a nuclear bomb, it has the designs, equipment and expertise to build one quickly if it were able to get enough weapons-grade uranium or plutonium.
A U.S. intelligence official said Saturday that Iraq has recently stepped up attempts to import industrial equipment that could be used to enrich uranium for use in nuclear weapons.
Several equipment shipments destined for Iraq have been stopped in recent months, the official said, declining to say by whom or where. It is unclear whether any shipments got through. U.S. intelligence officials, however, do not believe Iraq has obtained any enriched uranium or plutonium.
Many former inspectors say Iraq's arsenal is not much of a threat because Saddam has been deterred so far by fear of U.S. retaliation and apparently has been reluctant to share his weapons with terrorists.
Ritter resigned from the U.N. inspection team in August 1998 after several years as a member. He left denouncing the Clinton administration for having withdrawn support for the U.N. agency and undermining weapons inspections.
He has since said Washington used the inspectors to spy on Iraq — a longtime charge by Baghdad — and manipulated the United Nations to provoke a confrontation with Saddam as a pretext for U.S. airstrikes on Iraq.
Months after Ritter's resignation, U.N. inspectors complaining of lack of cooperation from Iraq left the country ahead of U.S.-British strikes and they have been barred from returning since then.
Thursday, September 05, 2002
House Intelligence Committee Member not convinced
CBS News
Lawmakers Not Convinced On Iraq
Sept 5, 2002
Lawmakers Not Convinced On Iraq
Sept 5, 2002
One member of the House Intelligence Committee complained that the president has not presented any compelling evidence for an attack on Iraq.
"I am not aware of information that would justify what they are talking about now," said Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.
Wednesday, September 04, 2002
Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11
CBS News
Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11
WASHINGTON, Sept. 4, 2002
(CBS) CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.
That's according to notes taken by aides who were with Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center on Sept. 11 – notes that show exactly where the road toward war with Iraq began, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.
At 9:53 a.m., just 15 minutes after the hijacked plane had hit the Pentagon, and while Rumsfeld was still outside helping with the injured, the National Security Agency, which monitors communications worldwide, intercepted a phone call from one of Osama bin Laden's operatives in Afghanistan to a phone number in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia.
The caller said he had "heard good news" and that another target was still to come; an indication he knew another airliner, the one that eventually crashed in Pennsylvania, was at that very moment zeroing in on Washington.
It was 12:05 p.m. when the director of Central Intelligence told Rumsfeld about the intercepted conversation.
Rumsfeld felt it was "vague," that it "might not mean something," and that there was "no good basis for hanging hat." In other words, the evidence was not clear-cut enough to justify military action against bin Laden.
But later that afternoon, the CIA reported the passenger manifests for the hijacked airliners showed three of the hijackers were suspected al Qaeda operatives.
"One guy is associate of Cole bomber," the notes say, a reference to the October 2000 suicide boat attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, which had also been the work of bin Laden.
With the intelligence all pointing toward bin Laden, Rumsfeld ordered the military to begin working on strike plans. And at 2:40 p.m., the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H." – meaning Saddam Hussein – "at same time. Not only UBL" – the initials used to identify Osama bin Laden.
Now, nearly one year later, there is still very little evidence Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. But if these notes are accurate, that didn't matter to Rumsfeld.
"Go massive," the notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."
Plans For Iraq Attack Began On 9/11
WASHINGTON, Sept. 4, 2002
(CBS) CBS News has learned that barely five hours after American Airlines Flight 77 plowed into the Pentagon, Defense Secretary Donald H. Rumsfeld was telling his aides to come up with plans for striking Iraq — even though there was no evidence linking Saddam Hussein to the attacks.
That's according to notes taken by aides who were with Rumsfeld in the National Military Command Center on Sept. 11 – notes that show exactly where the road toward war with Iraq began, reports CBS News National Security Correspondent David Martin.
At 9:53 a.m., just 15 minutes after the hijacked plane had hit the Pentagon, and while Rumsfeld was still outside helping with the injured, the National Security Agency, which monitors communications worldwide, intercepted a phone call from one of Osama bin Laden's operatives in Afghanistan to a phone number in the former Soviet Republic of Georgia.
The caller said he had "heard good news" and that another target was still to come; an indication he knew another airliner, the one that eventually crashed in Pennsylvania, was at that very moment zeroing in on Washington.
It was 12:05 p.m. when the director of Central Intelligence told Rumsfeld about the intercepted conversation.
Rumsfeld felt it was "vague," that it "might not mean something," and that there was "no good basis for hanging hat." In other words, the evidence was not clear-cut enough to justify military action against bin Laden.
But later that afternoon, the CIA reported the passenger manifests for the hijacked airliners showed three of the hijackers were suspected al Qaeda operatives.
"One guy is associate of Cole bomber," the notes say, a reference to the October 2000 suicide boat attack on the USS Cole in Yemen, which had also been the work of bin Laden.
With the intelligence all pointing toward bin Laden, Rumsfeld ordered the military to begin working on strike plans. And at 2:40 p.m., the notes quote Rumsfeld as saying he wanted "best info fast. Judge whether good enough hit S.H." – meaning Saddam Hussein – "at same time. Not only UBL" – the initials used to identify Osama bin Laden.
Now, nearly one year later, there is still very little evidence Iraq was involved in the Sept. 11 attacks. But if these notes are accurate, that didn't matter to Rumsfeld.
"Go massive," the notes quote him as saying. "Sweep it all up. Things related and not."
All articles in this archive are used under "fair use" as they are important to the national discussion of whether or not the people of this country are being deceived by their government. These articles are used as evidence in that discussion.
