HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Fast and Furious Scandal:...

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 02:44 PM

Fast and Furious Scandal: New Details Emerge on How the U.S. Government Armed Mexican Drug Cartels

via ABC/Univision News (video at link):

http://abcnews.go.com/ABC_Univision/News/fast-furious-scandal-details-emerge-us-government-armed/story?id=17352694#.UGyCWNWwUbG

By GERARDO REYES and SANTIAGO WILLS
Sept. 30, 2012

On January 30, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hit men parked themselves outside a birthday party of high school and college students in Villas de Salvarcar, Ciudad Juarez. Near midnight, the assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican cartel La Linea, broke into a one-story house and opened fire on a gathering of nearly 60 teenagers. Outside, lookouts gunned down a screaming neighbor and several students who had managed to escape. Fourteen young men and women were killed, and 12 more were wounded before the hit men finally fled.

Indirectly, the United States government played a role in the massacre by supplying some of the firearms used by the cartel murderers. Three of the high caliber weapons fired that night in Villas de Salvarcar were linked to a gun tracing operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF), according to a Mexican army document obtained exclusively by Univision News.

Univision News identified a total of 57 more previously unreported firearms that were bought by straw purchasers monitored by ATF during Operation Fast and Furious, and then recovered in Mexico in sites related to murders, kidnappings, and at least one other massacre.

As part of Operation Fast and Furious, ATF allowed 1,961 guns to "walk" out of the U.S. in an effort to identify the high profile cartel leaders who received them. The agency eventually lost track of the weapons, and they often ended up in the hands of Mexican hit men , including those who ordered and carried out the attack on Salvarcar and El Aliviane, a rehabilitation center in Ciudad Juarez where 18 young men were killed on September 2, 2009....


I can't wait for the first apologist to tell us F&F was "well intentioned"...

19 replies, 2105 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 19 replies Author Time Post
Reply Fast and Furious Scandal: New Details Emerge on How the U.S. Government Armed Mexican Drug Cartels (Original post)
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 OP
moobu2 Oct 2012 #1
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #2
bongbong Oct 2012 #6
Reasonable_Argument Oct 2012 #14
bongbong Oct 2012 #15
Reasonable_Argument Oct 2012 #16
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #18
bongbong Oct 2012 #19
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #8
former-republican Oct 2012 #9
Cali_Democrat Oct 2012 #3
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #4
DWC Oct 2012 #5
former-republican Oct 2012 #7
Eleanors38 Oct 2012 #10
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #11
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #12
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #12
friendly_iconoclast Oct 2012 #17

Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 02:52 PM

1. Well what do you think the intention was?

to supply guns to drug cartels do they could kill people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 02:57 PM

2. Whatever the intention, that turned out to be the result.

Some big fish at ATF need to 'resign to spend more time with their families'/be fired over this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 03:57 PM

6. Welcome to the Gungeon

 

Where you find the most unusual "Democratic" posts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #6)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 06:02 AM

14. So then...

 

You feel we should support gross incompetence just because the person who appointed you has a "D" after their name? Party before country should be your signature.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Reasonable_Argument (Reply #14)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 01:04 PM

15. Guns!

 

> Party before country should be your signature.

We know that you put guns before all else, and your sig reflects that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #15)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:40 PM

16. You didn't answer my question nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Reasonable_Argument (Reply #16)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:47 PM

18. Don't you know that the ends justify the means- if you have the 'proper' credentials

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Reasonable_Argument (Reply #16)

Mon Oct 8, 2012, 01:43 PM

19. What question was that?

 

Did you ask me, in not so many words, if guns were like rainbow colored unicorns? Or was it a question about the flowers-n-candy nature of guns?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to moobu2 (Reply #1)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 04:39 PM

8. There are a few possible "intentions," none of which are comforting:

(1) BATF/AG wanted to trace where the guns were going in order to ensnare major traffickers, but were wholly incompetent for the task;

(2) BATF/AG wanted to demonstrate how "porous" the borders are regarding gun smuggling to Mexico in order to give "credence" to calls for shutting down or restricting gun sales near the border, something which the Administration has favored; and

(3) BATF/CIA others wanted to divert guns to La Sinola cartel, as the other cartels were on the brink of bargaining power with the Mexican government for power-sharing, hence arming the other side would somehow weaken the competition's hold on power.

The last one is speculation, as for now. The second is a possibility for reasons stated, and also because gun-controllers are in dire need of some kind of "victory" upon which they would inevitably push for more and more restrictions. The first is most likely the case.

I don't expect the AG to hold power after the election no matter the outcome. And he shouldn't.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #8)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 04:50 PM

9. Holder should have been at the least fired from his position.

 

The report lacks any sense of reason . We are to believe that everything about the operation just made it shy of Holders desk.

He didn't know nothing.


Yet the rest of the justice dept knew about it.

Holder is either completely incompetent at his job or he lied.

Either way he should have been fired or brought up on charges.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 03:00 PM

3. A day late and a dollar short

Republicans have been screaming about the Univision piece. Since when do Republicans and their NRA buddies give a shit about Mexican teenagers?

Holder has been cleared by the Inspector General's report. There's nothing here, but that won't stop the cons from screaming.

Dooshbags.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 03:11 PM

4. "Since when do Republicans and their NRA buddies give a shit about Mexican teenagers?"

I agree that the Pubbies ire is selective. However, this raises a question:

Why didn't more of "us" give a shit about these same Mexican teenagers?

A lot of people here were more interested in downplaying F&F than in addressing the bloodshed it helped enable.
"Failed sting" was the usual anodyne phrase, iirc...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #4)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 03:47 PM

5. This was morally and legally wrong

 

Doesn't matter who did it.

Anyone who commits acts outside the Law is a criminal. In a Nation of Laws, that fact applies to all including elected and appointed officials whatever their political affiliation.

This video shows the horrors Fast & Furious has visited on citizens in Mexico. Those human beings don't claim Democrats or Republicans did this to them. They claim America did this to them - and they are right. This shame belongs to our entire Nation.

The Fast & Furious operation violated US Federal and International Laws and those in our government that were involved should be punished to the full extent of the Law.

Semper Fi,

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 04:00 PM

7. .... Holder cleared ...

 





He didn't know nothing.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Cali_Democrat (Reply #3)

Wed Oct 3, 2012, 05:08 PM

10. What he said...

"Why didn't more of "us" give a shit about these same Mexican teenagers"

The failure of enemy-creation (yours seems to be the NRA/GoP) to absolve one of responsibility.


"Why didn't more of "us" give a shit about these same Mexican teenagers"

One way of taking responsibility is to drop this meaningless gun-control/prohibition "outlook" (it is hardly a movement), and to work rapidly and dutifully to ending another prohibition: Currently-illegal drugs.















Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #10)

Thu Oct 4, 2012, 02:21 AM

11. Thank you. If the DEA had done something similar with fentanyl-laced heroin or meth...

... (for example) during the Bush years, we'd STILL be hearing about it here at DU- and rightly so.

But because: a) it concerned guns, and b) it was "our guys" that did it, only those who pointed out that Fast and Furious was a world-class fuckup even
mentioned the victims. The rest of the commenters were apparently thinking "Mustn't admit that the Republicans might actually be correct on this..."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Original post)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 04:07 AM

12. I note the most vigorous defender extant of the ATF's conduct has yet to comment on this.

I wonder why?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #12)

Fri Oct 5, 2012, 02:46 PM

17. I have asked for his commentary, and await his reply n.t.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread