rgr22j

Scott Ritter himself. From Slate:

"By his own admission, Ritter accepted $400,000 in funding two years ago from an Iraqi-American businessman named Shakir al-Khafaji. Ritter used the money to visit Baghdad and film a documentary purporting to tell the true story of the weapons inspections (which in his telling were corrupted by sinister American manipulation). As Hayes has reported, al-Khafaji is openly sympathetic to Saddam and regularly sponsors anti-American conferences in Baghdad. Al-Khafaji seems to have gotten his money's worth: The documentary was so anti-U.S., says one of Ritter's former U.N. colleagues, that Iraqi officials were passing out copies of it on CD-ROM at a recent international conference."

And yes, I do equate taking money from a curiously pro-Saddam businessman who regularly sponsors anti-American conferences in Baghdad with being on Saddam's payroll. Methinks this businessman may be getting more than a little cash from the deposed dictator.

You asked for expertise. You can't blow that up.

You would think Hillary would know something about it. But okay, how about Bill Clinton?

"Clinton also said Tuesday night that at the end of his term, there was 'a substantial amount of biological and chemical material unaccounted for' in Iraq.

"So I thought it was prudent for the president to go to the U.N. and for the U.N. to say, 'You got to let these inspectors in, and this time if you don't cooperate the penalty could be regime change, not just continued sanctions.'"

Clinton told King: "People can quarrel with whether we should have more troops in Afghanistan or internationalize Iraq or whatever, but it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons."

"it is incontestable that on the day I left office, there were unaccounted for stocks of biological and chemical weapons." -- Bill Clinton, July 22, 2003.

-- Alvin