Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
Seriously, what country are you from? I'm curious which country thinks it's normal for people to expose themselves to either adults or children.
APP - Former U.S. Marine and U.N. Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter
- Thread starter Scott
- Start date
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
What did he do for a day job? That might explain a lot more than being a Weekend Warrior.
Seriously, what country are you from? I'm curious which country thinks it's normal for people to expose themselves to either adults or children.Alright, let's take a look at the definition of entrapment:
**
noun law Action by law enforcement personnel to lead an otherwise innocent person to commit a crime, in order to arrest and prosecute that person for the crime.
**
Source:
Had law enforcement not lead Scott Ritter to try to meet with a law enforcement officer posing as a minor in the first instance and to expose himself to another law enforcement officer in the second, they wouldn't have been able to arrest and prosecute him. Sounds like entrapment to me, but as renowned sci fi author once put it:
"Law always chooses sides on the basis of enforcement power. Morality and legal niceties have little to do with it when the real question is: Who has the clout?"
Pretty sure I already told you, but once again, I'm Canadian Mexican. As to exposing oneself to others, that all depends on the context. It's certainly not a crime if an adult wishes to expose themselves to another adult who wishes to see such exposure. I'm sure you're aware that people are actually willing to pay quite a lot of money to be on the receiving end of such exposures, especially if the exposee is an attractive woman.
As to minors, I think it's important to remember that I've seen no evidence that Mr. Ritter ever exposed himself to an actual minor.
He did a lot of things. He actually has 2 Wikipedia pages, one a fair amount more in depth than the other. I'm not sure if I'll ever want to reveal either of them, but if you can figure out who he was by the following clue, I think you'll have earned knowing who he was:
"He worked at the VA hospital in Wilmington, Delaware."
It's all good so long as you follow the rules from here on... You'll be fine.
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
I do my best to always follow the rules but sometimes make mistakes.
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
WIth all due respect, Scott Ritter is a mindless sycophant, a gaslighting warmongering shill, from my observations.
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
this defense is insane.
a precedent like this would be a boon for every pedo out there.
what if trump was caught pedo-ing and said, oh I assumed she was really older. would that excuse work for you for Trump?
Last edited:
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
Scott Ritter is trash.
Totally worth it.
Totally worth it.
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
....and he's a twice convicted pedo.
I have a very different point of view of Scott Ritter. I say this having read many articles from Scott Ritter and having found many of them to be quite good. Is he a bit too uncritical of Russia? Perhaps. But the west piles on -so- much criticism of Russia, frequently undeserved, that it's nice to have a very different perpective sometimes.
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
are you scott ritter?
Why do you think that?
I strongly suspect that Trump violently raped a tied up 13 year old girl. I think we can agree that that's just a -tad- worse than flirting with an undercover officer. This was the testimony of an anonymous witness through her lawyer. Unfortunately, after receiving multiple death threats, she decided to opt out of a trial. You may not have heard of all of this, but just in case you're interested, an article on the story is here:
The lawsuit accusing Trump of raping a 13-year-old girl, explained
The anonymous plaintiff dropped her lawsuit against Trump, the circumstances around which have been bizarre.
www.vox.com
2 paragraphs that stick out in my mind:
**
Johnson claimed that Trump violently raped her when she was 13 at a 1994 orgy hosted by Jeffrey Epstein — the billionaire who was convicted in 2008 of soliciting an underage girl for prostitution and has been accused of having sex with more than 30 underage girls.
Johnson’s lawsuit mentioned Trump’s friendship with Epstein, and a comment Trump made in 2002 about their respective tastes in women: “I’ve known Jeff for 15 years. Terrific guy. He’s a lot of fun to be with. It is even said that he likes beautiful women as much as I do, and many of them are on the younger side.”
**
T. A. Gardner
Thread Killer
I think the question that needs an answer here is:
Why was Ritter targeted for an undercover operation to begin with?
Why was Ritter targeted for an undercover operation to begin with?
If I was Scott Ritter, I wouldn't have just read many of his articles, I would have written all of them
. As I've said many times in the past, I'm not even American. I'm Canadian-Mexican. But for a long time, I've been impressed with Scott Ritter's work. Is he a bit too uncritical of Russia? Perhaps. Because there are already -plenty- of mainstream sources that are -too- critical of Russia, so it's not like Russia lacks enough criticism.Exactly! And not only once, but twice. Plus, why were his sealed record of his first arrest made public to the prosecutors of his second and who unsealed his record? The New York Times articles I've been referencing so often here makes a reference to these unsealed records and how they had had the potential of throwing out his conviction, but Ritter's judge decided not to, even though she admitted that this state of affairs was unprecedented. From the article:
**
In the days leading up to Ritter’s sentencing in the last week of October, a significant development suddenly brought him new hope. Responding to an appeal from Ritter’s lawyers, a panel of appellate judges in New York ruled unanimously that the files from his 2001 arrest should never have been unsealed and used in his trial. This presented a legal quandary between two neighboring states; the records from Ritter’s arrests in New York were now under seal once again, but in the meantime they had been instrumental in convicting Ritter in Pennsylvania. His lawyers — Gary Kohlman, a white-collar trial lawyer in Washington, and Todd Henry, a Philadelphia-based specialist in sex crimes — filed a motion asking the judge in Pennsylvania to throw out the conviction.
On the morning of Ritter’s scheduled sentencing, he and Marina and the lawyers arrived back at the courthouse in Stroudsburg, Pa., and proceeded into a drab basement room to hear the ruling on their motion. Kohlman argued his case for vacating the verdict, but the judge, Jennifer Harlacher Sibum, was clearly unmoved, as she had been by most of Ritter’s arguments during the trial. She acknowledged that the legal issues raised by the simultaneous decisions in two separate states were unusual (“I don’t know that it’s ever been confronted in Pennsylvania,” she said at one point), but decided to proceed with sentencing anyway.
**
Further along the article, there's a passage which I think is quite important:
**
What really agonizes Ritter is that Americans seem to care about his forays into chat rooms, or about Michael Jackson’s doctor or the Kardashians’ wedding, but not about the moral crisis that Iraq unleashed on the land. They keep talking to Scott Ritter about justice for what he has done, and yet no one is paying for the larger crimes he believes were perpetrated against the society.
“Everybody who lied about the war got rewarded,” Ritter said. “Because they played the game. Tell the truth about the war, you don’t get rewarded.” He paused. “And then, you know, let’s be frank — you compound it with me shooting myself in the foot on personal, behavioral issues.” An awkward moment passed between us. “I’ll just ask the fundamental question,” Ritter said, looking at me squarely across the table. “My personal missteps — how many Americans have died as a result of that? None. Other than my family, how many victims were there? None. And yet, in refusing to engage in a responsible debate about Iraq, how many Americans died? Thousands. And America seems to have no problem with that.”
**
To be fair, -some- Americans care about the thousands of lives lost in America, but it seems that there are some in this forum that seem more interested in whether Ritter flirted with an undercover agent working to arrest him. To each their own I guess.
Blackwater Lunchbreak
Verified User
he turned me off by being a Zionist shill.If I was Scott Ritter, I wouldn't have just read many of his articles, I would have written all of them
He's definitely had a change of heart in regards to Israel. Take a look at this short clip on the death of a Gaza girl:
Is there a point to this?
Commander Dutch
Sworn to support and defend the Constitution
This is the APP section. He can post whatever he likes within the rules and participants have to abide by APP rules.
FWIW, I fell into the same pothole.
Rules for the Above Plain Politics Forum
(These rules apply solely to the APP Forum) <-- Please note, these rules apply there only...
This subforum has been created to encourage a higher level of conversation and debate. This subforum inherits all site wide rules, and has some additional caveats:
1. No racism, sexism, homophobia, general bigotry
2. No insults directed at specific individuals
3. No trolling
4. No flaming
5. No "Message Board Wars," please check personal vendettas at the door
6. No thread de-railment. Please stay on topic.
Please be courteous, kind, patient, intelligent and receptive to one another