'; print ''; print ''; print '
Receive FREE updates by email:
'; print ''; //exit; } #Added by Chris May 28th, 2003 in order to have both functions on one single page. if ($action != "") { # construct the full URL for the back end $fullurl = $url . '&email=' . urlencode($emailaddy); # do the subscribe (talk to the backend) $res = implode ('', file ($fullurl)); # modify the sections below as necessary - all likely result codes # are included below. Only one of "OK subbed", "OK email conf", or # "OK owner conf" needs to be present - which one depends on the list server # configuration. "OK subbed" is for a list which requires no confirmation at # all. "OK email conf" is for a list where the subscriber must respond to an # email message to be subscribed, and "OK owner conf" is for a list where # the list owner must approve subscriptions. If both an email confirmation # and a list owner approval are required, then "OK email conf" will be # returned. #Added by Chris May 28th, 2003 in order to have both functions on one single page. if ($action == "sub") { if ($res == "OK subbed\n") { print "Thank you for signing up for
$listname@$listhost as $emailaddy.


"; } elseif ($res == "OK email conf\n") { print "Your request to subscribe to $listname@$listhost as $emailaddy has been received. You will receive an email message requesting a reply to confirm your subscription. You must reply to this message or your subscription will not be completed.

"; } elseif ($res == "OK owner conf\n") { print "Your request to subscribe to $listname@$listhost as $emailaddy
has been send to the list owner for approval.


"; } elseif ($res == "ERR bad email\n") { print "You have not entered a valid
email address.


"; } elseif ($res == "ERR subbed\n") { print "You are already subscribed to
$listname@$listhost as $emailaddy.


"; } else { print "You must specify
the listserv name.


"; } } } ?>

Is Scott Ritter Credible?
By Reed Irvine and Cliff Kincaid
September 12, 2002


Scott Ritter, the former Marine who resigned his position as UN weapons inspector in Iraq in August 1998, has been seen frequently on television criticizing the Bush administrationís claim that Saddam Hussein is stockpiling weapons of mass destruction and must be overthrown. Ritter is presented or quoted as an authority on this subject. For example, on Labor Day, former CIA director James Woolsey told CNNís Wolf Blitzer that clearly Iraq has "substantial chemical and bacteriological weapons," Blitzer responded, "Scott Ritter, the former UN weapons inspector, he was there. He doesnít believe it."

Scott Ritter was there from the end of the Gulf War until 1998 to help enforce the cease-fire agreement and the UN resolution that prohibited Iraq from possessing or developing weapons of mass destruction. His former boss, Richard Butler, who headed the UN inspection team, recalled later that Ritter resigned because Saddam was not allowing the UN inspectors to do their job. Ritter himself testified that under Saddamís direct orders, the Iraqi government had lied to the Commission about its weapons stockpiles and that "Iraq presents a clear and present danger to international peace and security."

Ritter at the time blamed the Clinton administration, saying they feared a confrontation with Iraq. He criticized it for refusing to support the inspection process with a legitimate use of force. He said that since April of Ď98, "we had not been allowed to do these tasks, largely because of pressure placed upon the Special Commission by administration officials."

Ritter has made an about face. He now says "Iraq has been disarmed fundamentally. Their weapons programs have been eliminated. Iraq poses no threat to any of its neighbors. It does not threaten its region. It does not threaten the United States. It does not threaten the world." This is the line he was taking as a guest on Phil Donahueís first show on MSNBC last July. Senator James Inhofe, the other guest, charged that what Ritter was saying was the opposite of the testimony he had given the Senate Intelligence Committee. Ritter tried to deny it, but the Senator read from a copy of the transcript, proving that Ritter had just contradicted what he had said under oath. That should have destroyed Ritterís credibility, but Ritter keeps getting time on TV and being cited as an authority on CNN.

We hate to say it, but Scott Ritter has apparently sold out. He received $400,000 from an Iraqi-American businessman with close ties to Saddam for the purpose of producing a documentary called "In Shifting Sands." The Weekly Standard described it as a film that "would chronicle the weapons-inspection process" and quoted Ritter as saying it would "de-demonize" Iraq.

Ritter was welcomed into Iraq in July 2000 to conduct interviews, and he was praised on the official Iraqi Web site. Ritter claims the 90-minute film, which as far as we are know hasnít aired anywhere, is an attempt to be objective, but he said "The U.S. will definitely not like this film."

Reed Irvine can be reached at ri@aim.org