Scott Ritter On The Dangerous Lie That Is David Albright
June 26, 2008, Matthew Good If you read one thing this weekend, or month for that matter, read this piece by former UN Weapons Inspector Scott Ritter. In it, Ritter confronts the shady practices of David Albright, the president of the Institute for Science and International Security, an organization that Albright himself started. Two of the more revealing passages from Ritter’s piece read…
I can’t say for certain when Albright became “Doctor” Albright. A self-described “physicist,” he allows the term to linger, as he does the title “former U.N. inspector,” in order to create the impression that he possesses a certain gravitas. David Albright holds a Master of Science degree in physics from Indiana University and a Master of Science in mathematics from Wright State University. I imagine that this résumé permits him to assign himself the title physicist, but not in the Robert Oppenheimer/Edward Teller sense of the word. Whatever physics work David Albright may or may not have done in his life, one thing is certain: He has never worked as a nuclear physicist on any program dedicated to the design and/or manufacture of nuclear weapons. He has never designed nuclear weapons and never conducted mathematical calculations in support of testing nuclear weapons, nor has he ever worked in a facility or with an organization dedicated to either.
At best, Albright is an observer of things nuclear. But to associate his sub-par physics pedigree with genuine nuclear weapons-related work is, like his self-promotion as a “former U.N. weapons inspector,” disingenuous in the extreme. His lack of any advanced educational training as a nuclear physicist, combined with his dearth of practical experience with things nuclear, is further exacerbated by his astounding assumption of the title Doctor. In 2007 Albright received an honorary Doctorate of Humane Letters from Wright State University. This honorary award is a recognition which should never be belittled, but it in no way elevates David Albright to the status of one who has undergone the formal educational training and has actually earned a doctorate, especially in the demanding field of nuclear physics. While I cannot find any evidence of Albright promoting his honorary title in a manner which indicates direct fraud on his part (i.e., falsely claiming to be a Ph.D. in physics), there are far too many instances where he is referred to by those who interview him as being both “Dr. Albright” and a “physicist” that the uninformed reader might be misled into believing that the two were somehow connected.”
Secondly, and this is of paramount importance…
“David Albright has a history of being used by those who seek to gain media attention for their respective claims. In addition to the Hamza and Obeidi fiascos, Albright and his organization, ISIS, have served as the conduit for other agencies gaining publicity about the alleged Iranian nuclear weapons program, the alleged Syrian nuclear reactor, and most recently the alleged Swiss computer containing sensitive nuclear design information. On each occasion, Albright is fed sensitive information from a third party, and then packages it in a manner which is consumable by the media. The media, engrossed with Albright’s misleading résumé (”former U.N. weapons inspector,” “Doctor,” “physicist” and “nuclear expert”). give Albright a full hearing, during which time the particulars the third-party source wanted made public are broadcast or printed for all the world to see. More often than not, it turns out that the core of the story pushed by Albright was, in fact, wrong.
While Iran did indeed possess uranium enrichment capability at Natanz and a heavy water plant (under construction) at Arak (as reported by Albright thanks to information provided by the Iranian opposition group MEK, most probably with the help of Israeli intelligence), Albright’s wild speculation about weapons-grade plutonium and highly enriched uranium proved to be wrong. There was indeed a building in Syria which was bombed by Israel. But Albright’s expert opinion, derived from his interpretation of photographs, consists of nothing more than simplistic observation (”The tall building in the image may house a reactor under construction and the pump station along the river may have been intended to supply cooling water to the reactor”) combined with unfocused questions which assumed much, but were in fact based on little (”How far along was the reactor construction project when it was bombed? What was the extent of nuclear assistance from North Korea? Which reactor components did Syria obtain from North Korea or elsewhere, and where are they now?”). And, most recently, we have Albright commenting about the contents of a computer he hasn’t even laid eyes on, though he feels confident enough to raise the specter of global nuclear catastrophe (”How will authorities learn if Iran, North Korea, or even terrorists bought these designs?” Albright asks when referring to the contents of the Swiss computer).
Nowhere in his résumé does Albright cite any formal training as a photographic interpreter; in any case, one would have to have an intimate knowledge of nuclear facilities in order to know what one was looking at when examining an aerial image. A genuine nuclear weapons expert would have been able to discern the technical faults in the logic of the stories being peddled by Albright. And a genuine former U.N. weapons inspector, well versed in preparing airtight investigations based upon verified intelligence information, would have balked at the shabby nature of the evidence provided. Again, because Albright is neither, he and ISIS play the role of patsy, the middleman peddling misinformation to a media too lazy to conduct their own due diligence before running with a story.”
This little symbol lets you @ another comment

Politico wrote yesterday about how the commercial MSM routinely manufactures dubious titles for on air guest “experts” to give their broadcasts greater credibility; so more people will watch; so they can charge advertisers more for commercials which will in turn boost parent company stock prices. It’s a well known inside joke at least inside the beltway.
‘Meet the make-believe strategists of TV’
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0608/11319.html
That’s scary: but what’s worse is the ‘meet the make-believe strategists of TV’. The sifters of shite from the truth. And guess which one we get spoonfed. So, now these ’shady practices’ are revealed, what will happen now, do you think?
[quote comment="56836"]That’s scary: but what’s worse is the ‘meet the make-believe strategists of TV’. The sifters of shite from the truth. And guess which one we get spoonfed. So, now these ’shady practices’ are revealed, what will happen now, do you think?[/quote]
ProPublica and the future of non-profit journalism (click the PBS NewsHour link):
http://www.propublica.org/article/propublica-on-pbs-and-npr/#When:16:31:00Z
Thanks for the link RRC
Actually, we are the patsies.
off topic…
but just saw the tv commercial and had to click through
to the site, to see this is really happening:
“songs of praise for america”…
http://www.directv.com/songsofpraise/
sad and scary at the same time.
vincent, in buffalo
Um, seems its a July 4th celebration featuring Christian artists…..the problem with that being?
[quote comment="56920"]off topic…
but just saw the tv commercial and had to click through
to the site, to see this is really happening:
“songs of praise for america”…
http://www.directv.com/songsofpraise/
sad and scary at the same time.
vincent, in buffalo[/quote]
Why? Because people are choosing to practice their faith openly?
I love it when my fellow lefties preach tolerance, and then openly practice hypocrisy…
/sarcasm
…and yes, I realize my last name is Allbright, please ignore that I’m probably related to that tool mentioned in the post above…
I don’t know what shocks me more: the fact that a guy who has two Msc’s pretending to be a PhD, or the fact that people listen to this guy. When I first heard about the Syrian “construction site,” I thought ‘Oh great, here comes the Powell UN Security Council report again.’ Ritter’s comments only further afirmed my views.
I suppose we are all to blame somewhat for shite like this. We choose to listen and take it as fact since it’s been so properly and “expertly” catered and packaged to be delivered in a thirty second sound-bite. Due dilligence is one thing when it’s in the hands of major news corporations (or, you know, not), but it’s a completely different story when it’s in the hands of the targeted audience. I don’t know if it’s a question of 21st Century laziness or our inability to properly research anything due to time restraints. Either way, when we have people who are being paid to package “facts” for the masses to digest, it’s not very hard to see why garbage like Albright is taken seriously with such ease.
Thanks for this one, Matt. It is a great read for everyone.
re: “songs of praise for america”…
no problem with Christian artists celebrating 4th of July-
or people choosing to practice their faith openly.
but i don’t think its hypocritical to prefer to keep your spirituality
separate from your citizenship-
as it is so much greater…
and also while there is much to be proud of in what
America has brought to the world in a few hundred years-
but that connecting it to divine providence or grace
diminishes what is being celebrated.
this is a commercial for my army and my navy.
vincent, in buffalo