Scott Ritter of Delmar is well known internationally as an outspoken, former U.N. weapons inspector. Now more information is coming to light about Ritter's past and a disturbing arrest. His attorney confirms he was arrested in 2001, but neither she nor police will discuss the details.
It turns out that Ritter, who has been very critical of Bush's warmongering, may or may not have been arrested in 2001 for one of my "favorite" online crimes -- soliciting sex from a person it's completely legal to solicit sex from. It turns out he was probably arrested for attempting to solicit sex in an Internet (probably AOL) chatroom from someone he may (or may not) have thought was a 16 year old girl. Of course he did no such thing in reality. Instead he solicited sex from a definetly legal (probably 30-40 something, probably male) person posing as a 16 year old girl in an Internet (probably AOL) chatroom. Ritter was never charged. Forgetting the shaky, though precedent covered, legality of the arrest, this is the kind of thing that gets conspiracies started.
An outspoken critic of administration policy charged with an indefensible crime... My best guess is this is the last we ever hear from Mr. Ritter. He will get the message, "Be quiet and this will go away, but if you keep talking we keep alledging." This is the kind of crime that government can use to destroy someone without the slightest bit of proof. The accusation itself is enough to sully his reputation with the majority of media sheep. Those who will not look past the entrapping nature of the crime he's charged with. Those who will not look for real evidence of guilt or innocence if one assumes this is actually a crime. Check the lead of the MSNBC story above. His arrest is "disturbing" even though no charges were ever filed. When no charges are filed, I assume that the arrest was in error. MSNBC obviously assumes he was guilty of something if they feel his mere arrest was disturbing. Do you think that if he'd have been arrested for accounting fraud but no charges were ever filed that they would either label the arrest "distrubing" or cover it at all?
No comments:
Post a Comment