Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

UN's Ritter faced sex rap
New York Daily News ^ | 1/19/03 | Joe Mahoney

Posted on 01/19/2003 1:15:49 AM PST by kattracks

ALBANY - Former UN weapons inspector Scott Ritter was secretly prosecuted in Albany County in 2001 after he was snared in an Internet sex sting operation, law enforcement sources told the Daily News.

Ritter, who lives in the Albany suburb of Delmar, is now a high-profile critic of President Bush's war preparations.

He was arrested by Colonie Police in June 2001 on a misdemeanor charge after he allegedly had a sexual discussion on the Internet with an undercover investigator he thought was an underage girl, law enforcement sources disclosed on condition of anonymity.

The case was sealed, and Colonie officials declined to release the arrest records, explaining the matter was adjourned in local court in contemplation of dismissal.

The Schenectady Daily Gazette reported yesterday that Albany District Attorney Paul Clyne fired veteran Assistant District Attorney Cynthia Preiser last week for failing to inform him of the case against Ritter.

Clyne said that as a "sensitive" case, it should have been brought to his attention.

Ritter, who has made frequent appearances on network television after speaking to the Iraq National Assembly last year, could not be reached for comment.

Joe Mahoney



TOPICS: Breaking News; Crime/Corruption; News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: napalminthemorning; pedophile; scottritter; treason; un; weaponsinspector; wot
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 601-617 next last
To: Miss Marple
It may be likely that the author of the blackmail is Saddam Hussein, because he has documented evidence of something that would destroy Ritter. I would say underage sex would do a pretty good job of that.

Baloney. All he'd have to do was be more pro-bomb Iraq. No one would believe Saddam, even if it WAS true. You've got to be kidding.

Now, it is quite possible that the Clintons found out about this and covered up the arrest in their carrot/stick approach

Because the Klintons controlled the Intelligence Agencies in July 2001?

You're out of your partisan mind.

501 posted on 01/19/2003 6:25:04 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 449 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
You already agreed with me that this incident was not the basis for "turning" Ritter, therefore that question is irrelevant, a sideshow, a distraction, and a blind alley.

You can't expect blind partisans to think. But at least you're making it clear to observers...

If anything Bush is the one who could reward her.
And the Republicans control the Intelligence establishment (errr... at least on paper), and would be the ones briefed about Ritter's activities.

502 posted on 01/19/2003 6:27:01 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 455 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
Maybe he knows something that does not need to be blabbed on national television.

Ritter knows nothing. He has no security clearance or access to up-to-date, reliable information.

He's spewing propaganda at someone's behest.

503 posted on 01/19/2003 6:28:17 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 499 | View Replies]

To: kattracks
This surprises me not at all.

I can't wait to see future interviews with Scotty. When he starts yelling and getting belligerent, all they have to do is start asking him about his kiddie-raper beef. Scott will probably burst a blood vessel in his neck and die.

504 posted on 01/19/2003 6:29:32 PM PST by Excuse_My_Bellicosity
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
Its called THE LAW...
505 posted on 01/19/2003 6:30:37 PM PST by marajade
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 496 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
You apparently have decided that this is a Republican operation. Why, I have no idea, since most of the players in this are democrats.

Whatever. I am done arguing about it. You have no proof, nor do I. I will continue watching to see what develops.

However, I do think that Ritter has SOMETHING in his background that caused him to support Iraq and also to act practically nutty whenever he appears on television.

Perhaps this is a red herring. Or not. YOU don't know any more than I do.

506 posted on 01/19/2003 6:31:03 PM PST by Miss Marple
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: Zviadist
Absolutely no possibility of conducting such a large scale coverup of such a prominent and observed figure without the Feds knowing about it. Which means they supported it.

He was found not guilty. Are you retarded?

No, but I can understand why you missed the point, if English is your second language.

The COURT sealed the records. Of a charge that was not a felony. That requires a judge, and prosecutor to agree.

Normally, this would be no problem - except we have a high profile person who accepted $400,000 from an enemy power, just after completing one of the most high profile jobs on the planet. Someone who is surely being monitored by intelligence agents, for his public pronouncements against state policy in Year 2000 - BEFORE his arrest in July 2001.

The POINT Is : There's no way he could have been innocently arrested by local cops, without the feds knowing it, approving of it, or orchestrating it.

507 posted on 01/19/2003 6:32:42 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 470 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
I'm not sure we agree on our inferences, but I certainly agree with your logic here.
508 posted on 01/19/2003 6:33:59 PM PST by The Great Satan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
What is relevant is how old Ritter thought she/he was.

Very relevant. Because there's a great deal of difference between a 17 yr old college student with a birthday coming up, who is coming on to you - and a 10 yr old girl.

509 posted on 01/19/2003 6:34:57 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 484 | View Replies]

To: Excuse_My_Bellicosity
I can't wait to see future interviews with Scotty. When he starts yelling and getting belligerent, all they have to do is start asking him about his kiddie-raper beef.

Wouldn't that scenario only present itself if the media *didn't* actually enjoy and gain an audience by showing Ritter? I believe they have him on just to be "balanced" and they (liberal slanted media, remember) *want* what he says to be true.  Ritter is a handy looney that draws viewers to the "debate".    jmo anyhow
510 posted on 01/19/2003 6:35:04 PM PST by GirlShortstop
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 504 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
Pied Piper Ritter will be discredited after he has led his left-wing minions over a cliff, and not before.

:)

I covered that one too - set up your own opposition.

Problem with most people is - they believe what ever is printed in the newspaper or they see on TV. FR is corrupted by this, but so is all of society.

511 posted on 01/19/2003 6:36:11 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 485 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
You're out of your partisan mind.

Well!

I guess you told HER, didn't you!

BTW, your reasoning stinks and you're rude.

512 posted on 01/19/2003 6:36:58 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 501 | View Replies]

To: The Great Satan
It's days like this that almost make me wish I didn't care, and could sign up for a position becoming one of the wolves......
513 posted on 01/19/2003 6:37:19 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 485 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55; aristeides; thinden
I haven't read this thread, but my first reaction was that this 'incident' was contrived to silence Ritter, not merely discredit him.
514 posted on 01/19/2003 6:39:23 PM PST by Fred Mertz
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 509 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
However, I do think that Ritter has SOMETHING in his background that caused him to support Iraq and also to act practically nutty whenever he appears on television.

Observations made and commented much upon well before this revelation. I do not recall one person saying how well this was playing into President Bush's hands. No, most were aghast at his seemingly treasonous behavior.

515 posted on 01/19/2003 6:40:10 PM PST by cyncooper
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 506 | View Replies]

To: Cultural Jihad
since you have not repudiated your earlier call for the legalization of child pornography possession.

I'm not the one who wants to put parents and grandparents on trial for possession of bathing photos of their children. And 'maybe' the juries will let them off.

516 posted on 01/19/2003 6:40:24 PM PST by DAnconia55
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 498 | View Replies]

To: DAnconia55
who accepted $400,000 from an enemy power,

This is a lie! You are a slanderer. The money did NOT come from a foreign power, but rather from an AMERICAN citizen. And the film was overtly ANTI-Saddam. You believe all the crap shoveled at you? I guess so. Sheep...

517 posted on 01/19/2003 6:41:42 PM PST by Zviadist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 507 | View Replies]

To: Miss Marple
Arlen Specter used to be a democrat

I generally never refer to Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter, without naming him Arlen "Magic Bullet" Specter.

So, if we create a 'novel theory' (read bulls**t) that explains the murder of a President to be the work of a lone gunman, we can become head of the Senate Intelligence Committee.

That's a pretty neat trick, hmmm?

518 posted on 01/19/2003 6:42:27 PM PST by DAnconia55 (BTW, that case ALSO proves Demons and Republicans cooperate in conspiracies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 500 | View Replies]

Comment #519 Removed by Moderator

To: DAnconia55
Solicitation requires payment.

Where are you coming up with this stuff? Are you making it up on the fly?

Solicitation for murder doesn't require payment. It does require one person asking another person (that's the "solicit" part) to commit a murder. The transfer of funds, goods, or anything else tangible or intangible, or promise to do so is incidental.

One entry found for solicitation.

Main Entry: so·lic·i·ta·tion
Pronunciation: s&-"li-s&-'tA-sh&n
Function: noun
Date: circa 1520
1 : the practice or act or an instance of soliciting; especially : ENTREATY, IMPORTUNITY
2 : a moving or drawing force : INCITEMENT, ALLUREMENT

 

One entry found for solicit.

Main Entry: so·lic·it
Pronunciation: s&-'li-s&t
Function: verb
Etymology: Middle English, to disturb, take charge of, from Middle French solliciter, from Latin sollicitare to disturb, from sollicitus anxious, from sollus whole (from Oscan; akin to Greek holos whole) + citus, past participle of ciEre to move -- more at SAFE, -KINESIS
Date: 15th century
transitive senses
1 a : to make petition to : ENTREAT b : to approach with a request or plea
2 : to urge (as one's cause) strongly
3 a : to entice or lure especially into evil b : to proposition (someone) especially as or in the character of a prostitute
4 : to try to obtain by usually urgent requests or pleas
intransitive senses
1 : to make solicitation : IMPORTUNE
2 of a prostitute : to offer to have sexual relations with someone for money
synonym see ASK
520 posted on 01/19/2003 6:45:00 PM PST by Catspaw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 494 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20 ... 481-500501-520521-540 ... 601-617 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson