Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

A sane persons guide to Fast and Furious

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU
 
DanTex Donating Member (734 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 09:51 AM
Original message
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 09:54 AM by DanTex
A good, sober overview of F&F, as well as a discussion of the conspiratorial lunacy that has spread throughout the right-wing gun blogs, and, sad to say, even found its way into this forum on occasion.

http://blogs.ajc.com/jay-bookman-blog/2011/10/13/a-sane... /

One Republican congressman has suggested that Attorney General Eric Holder ought to be arrested and face criminal charges of being an accessory to murder, and that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, Secretary of Homeland Security Janet Napolitano and even President Obama might be implicated.

Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association calls it the biggest cover-up since Watergate and describes Operation Fast and Furious as just one part of Barack Obamas agenda to attack gun owners and our Second Amendment rights. Conservative bloggers are even arguing that the Fast and Furious case constitutes grounds for impeachment, with claims that its the Reichstag fire of the Second Amendment.

An excitable little bunch, arent they?

...

The truth is, the right has fixated on Fast and Furious not because it wants the federal government to become more effective in its efforts to stop gunrunning across the Mexican border. Quite the contrary. It wants to raise such a stink about Fast and Furious that the government is forced to stop undercover gun-trafficking investigations altogether. They see this as an opportunity to discredit and handcuff ATF, an agency that the NRA and others view as a hated enemy.

...
Refresh | 0 Recommendations Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
ProgressiveProfessor Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 09:57 AM
Response to Original message
1. Duplicate post
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Did you consider linking to it or having it moved to this forum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Lurks Often Donating Member (505 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:22 AM
Response to Original message
2. What a farce
The writer is stating an opinion and given your posts your are hardly objective on the subject.

Fast & Furious has led to the death of 2 Americans in law enforcement and 200+ Mexicans, including IIRC, Mexican government employees, including a judge.

There is also sworn testimony from rank and file ATF agents that the Mexican government was unaware of the operation and that once the guns cross the US/Mexico border, ATF had no way of tracking the guns.

And please show a post where anybody on this board is against investigating and arresting anybody involved in illegal gun purchases.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DissedByBush Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 10:10 PM
Response to Reply #2
98. You state exactly why we know there was no intent to trace
If they had planned to trace they would have told the Mexican government of the guns coming their way, most likely enlisted their cooperation.

Other aspects of the overall operation did involve close cooperation with the Mexican government, just not the Fast & Furious part.

ATF is lying their asses off.

Perjury charges, go directly to jail, do not collect 200.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:51 AM
Response to Original message
3. I have no idea why
nor am I going to speculate why the ATF pulled this stunt. I will say this is not one of the blogger's better posts. Granted, LaPierre and Dennis Henigan, his Brady counter part, both love the hyperbole to the point of being irrational. Come to think of it, they are both irrational.

One single individual tracked during the Fast and Furious investigation bought more than 700 weapons for transfer to the Mexican cartels, in some cases purchasing 20 or more AK-47-type assault weapons in a single purchase.

If I remember this case correctly, the dealer refused the sale at first and called the ATF, who told dealer to sell them anyway because he was on of the ones they were tracking.

The investigation attempted to trace 1,500 to 2,000 firearms as they were purchased here in the United States by agents of Mexican drug cartels and then smuggled across the border. The ATFs aim was to use that information to prosecute, disarm and break the cartels.

Trace? How? Mexican officials were not informed and ATF has no jurisdiction in Mexico. There was no tracing mechinism in place.

The flow of firearms across the U.S. border is a serious challenge. So far, some 65,000 guns confiscated in Mexico by authorities have been traced back to gun purchases made here in the United States.

An even biger challenge for Mexico are the full auto assault rifles, machine guns, and crew serviced weapons entering through the southern border and the grenades and rocket launchers from places like Korea. This has been pointed out by right wing rags :sarcasm: as the Latin American Herald and McClatchy (who even put the Wikileaks cables online as citations).

The undercover aspect of the operation is particularly galling to the NRA because it recalls sting operations conducted by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others. In those operations, private detectives went to gun shops and gun shows and were sold guns even though they told the gun sellers that they werent legally eligible to buy weapons. The fact that federal officials are using similar tactics outrages the NRA.

The two are nothing alike. Let's take this one further.

private detectives went to gun shops and gun shows and were sold guns even though they told the gun sellers that they werent legally eligible to buy weapons.

First, if they went in a gun shop they went though a background check. Second, the ATF sent Bloomburg a letter telling him to stop because 1) his crew was screwing up their investigatins and 2) his PIs were committing federal crimes by lying to an FFL (federal firearms license) and lying on ATF form 4473. These sales did not happen. As far as the private sellers at gun show are concerned, I would like to see the unedited version. If James O'Keefe taught us anything, it is never take video at face value. Why would I doubt Bloomburg's honesty? He is a Republican for one thing.

Oh yeah, when will bong owners face up to the fact that they have been financially supporting the gang wars?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Glassunion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 11:45 AM
Response to Reply #3
4. My question is where did the 65,000 number come from?
That is a new one to me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Remmah2 Donating Member (971 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 12:15 PM
Response to Original message
5. Update on ATF foolishness
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 12:15 PM by Remmah2
Sane people? Right :sarcasm:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2011/10/14/earlyshow/mai...

"Grenade-walking" part of "Gunwalker" scandal


(excerpt):
"CBS News investigative correspondent Sharyl Attkisson, who has reported on this story from the beginning, said on "The Early Show" that the investigation into the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF)'s so-called "Fast and Furious" operation branches out to a case involving grenades. Sources tell her a suspect was left to traffic and manufacture them for Mexican drug cartels.

Police say Jean Baptiste Kingery, a U.S. citizen, was a veritable grenade machine. He's accused of smuggling parts for as many as 2,000 grenades into Mexico for killer drug cartels -- sometimes under the direct watch of U.S. law enforcement. "


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Nuclear Unicorn Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Oct-20-11 02:31 PM
Response to Reply #5
93. Obviously we need to close the Grenade Show Loophole n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Upton Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
6.  Holder is a liar..
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 01:03 PM
Response to Original message
7. So-o-o, Dan, whatever happened to Sharyl Atkkisson (CBS)? She go insane? nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 01:54 PM
Response to Original message
8. Definitely not a tracking operation.
I don't think you have to be any kind of conspiracy theorist to understand at this point that this was not an attempt at tracking firearms to cartels, as the current cover story goes.

We know, from Congressional testimony, that the Mexican government was not informed of this operation, nor was the ATF field branch in Mexico informed. Both of these parties should have been informed in any kind of international firearm tracking mission. In short, there was no attempt to trace firearms once they crossed the border into Mexico. Unless the Congressional testimony was a lie, this is almost a fact.

So, if it wasn't an arms tracking exercise, what was it?

At this point, we can only speculate.

It is known that the Obama administration has indicated it is receptive to renewed efforts at an international treaty restricting the traffic of small arms.
This is a fact.

It is known that President Obama met with James and Sarah Brady on March 30, 2011, and told them, "I just want you to know that we are working on it. We have to go through a few processes, but under the radar."
This is a fact.

We know that Eric Holder attempted to float a renewed Assault Weapons Ban on behalf of President Obama's administration when on February 25, 2009 he said, "As President Obama indicated during the campaign, there are just a few gun-related changes that we would like to make, and among them would be to reinstitute the ban on the sale of assault weapons."
This is a fact.

According to the Washington Post, a CIA insider claimed that the CIA was behind Fast and Furious, in an attempt to combat the Los Zetas cartel by arming the rival Sinaloa cartel.
This is unsubstantiated.

According to recent court filings by former Sinaloa cartel member Jesus Vicente Zambada Niebla, the CIA has allowed a 747 of cocaine to fly into US airspace unmolested.
This is unsubstantiated.

In April, Fast & Furious weapons turned up in the home of Jose Antonio Torres Marrufo, in Juarez, Mexico. Marrufo is a leader in the Sinaloa cartel.
This is a fact.

A US government source told the Los Angeles Times: "These Fast and Furious guns were going to Sinaloans, and they are killing everyone down there."
This is unsubstantiated.

The United States has a long and sordid history of playing rivals against each other for its own benefit. See: The Bay of Pigs Invasion, Noriega, School of the Americas, Saddam Hussien, Gaddaff, the Shah of Iran, and countless other examples. Even today in Iraq and Afghanistan we routinely pay off warlords for their support even when they are involved in questionable activities or have questionable allegiances. My father-in-law has an ex-soldier who works for him who's job was to tote the money around in the Middle East to make these payoffs.
This is a fact.

What can be drawn from all of this? Well it is all speculation. My personal opinion at this time is that this was a CIA-backed operation to channel firearms to the Sinaloa cartel in the hopes of countering the growing power of the Los Zetas cartel which is growing powerful enough to take over the Mexican government. It's possible that this was done intentionally through civilian, rather than military, channels first to give plausible deniability, but it would also have the happy (depending on whose side you are on) consequence of helping make the case for restricting assault weapons.

But it is pretty much a certainty at this stage of the game that this was not a tracking operation or a "sting" gone bad.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DanTex Donating Member (734 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 05:22 PM
Response to Reply #8
12. Conspiracy theories...
Since the facts aren't all out, nothing is "definite", but what we currently know points to a straightforward, non-conspiratorial explanation: they let the guns walk in order to identify bigger fish rather than low-level traffickers. If it were drugs or money, this wouldn't be a big deal, but since we're talking about guns, it is a big deal, because guns kill people.

There are things that neither you nor I understand about F&F, but the mistake you (and others) are making is assuming that just because you aren't able to put the puzzle together, that it can't be put together at all (e.g. "well then YOU explain why there are no stars in any of the Apollo pictures they took on the moon! It's cause it DEFINITELY WASNT ON THE MOON!!!!!!!"). For example, I don't know why Mexico wasn't notified. Maybe they thought Mexico would have the operation shut down. Maybe they were afraid of leaks. Or, as happens frequently in this sort of situation, something that neither of us has thought of. But the fact that we don't yet know the details doesn't even come close to proving that it was anything more than a gun tracking operation gone awry.

The only thing that comes close to being "definite" is that this was not some conspiracy to inflate numbers and justify a new AWB. Here, not only is there no evidence at all, but even the circumstantial and vague allegations make no sense. So what if Holder favors the AWB? Are you aware that most Americans are also in favor of AWB? Being in favor of AWB doesn't make him some gun grabbing extremist, it just makes him an average American. Also, I don't know if you pay much attention to the non-gun-related news, but if you do, then you know that Obama's got much bigger things on his plate than to be wasting his time hatching up bizarre illegal schemes to justify stronger gun control laws. And, by the way, to rational humans, "under the radar" just means not making any public announcements, it's not code for "we've got a secret illegal propaganda conspiracy going".

On top of that, there's the fact that, as this article points out, some 65,000 guns have been recovered in Mexico and traced back to the US market. And this number only counts the guns that were (a) recovered and (b) traced, meaning that the actual number of guns trafficked to Mexico is much larger, and the 2000 F&F guns are a drop in the bucket. Even if you quibble with the numbers (90% vs 75% or whatever), there's simply no way that the F&F guns would make any kind of substantial difference to the totals, which means there is basically no propaganda value here, thus killing the entire basis of the "pumping up the numbers" theory. What's more, it's looking like F&F was not the first operation where guns were "walked", it also happened under the Bush administration in operation "Wide Receiver". So much for the theory that this was all hatched by the Obama or Holder or Hillary Clinton or whoever else the loony right is trying to drag into it these days.

As for the other conspiracy, that this was an attempt to help out the Zetas, I'll grant you that it's not as obviously preposterous as the first one, but there's still no evidence. It is true that the US has a history of intervening in foreign conflicts, especially in Latin America. In fact, from what I understand, there is some evidence suggesting that the CIA was involved in supporting "Los Pepes" against Pablo Escobar. So, as Mexico approaches narco-statehood, I wouldn't put it past the CIA to be doing something similar in Mexico. Having said that, it would be a little surprising if F&F were a part of it, but then, I have no experience planning secret gunrunning operations for the CIA, so I have no idea if this is the kind of thing they'd go for, and I suspect you don't either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:01 PM
Response to Reply #12
13. Only if you call CBS
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 06:04 PM by gejohnston
and McClatchy on the same level as WND. One correction, the actual percentage being traced to the US is more like 12-17 percent. The numbers you cite is a percentage of only those submitted to the ATF, a much smaller number. There is no evidence the rest would have come from the US.
Where does he get 65,000?
It was not to help the Zetas, it would be to help out their competitors.

What are your thoughts on this one:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DanTex Donating Member (734 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:04 PM
Response to Reply #13
14. What are you talking about?
What in my post has anything to do with CBS versus McClatchy vs WND or whatever? Did you get stuck in "talking point mode"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:11 PM
Response to Reply #14
15. No it seems like
you think anything outside of a legitimate sting operation gone bad, is in black helicopter land. How does someone so stupid as to not to ask himself "how are we going to track these things" and not have a detailed plan to do so could become federal agents, let alone be in charge of anything.?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Atypical Liberal Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #12
17. That just doesn't hold water.
Since the facts aren't all out, nothing is "definite", but what we currently know points to a straightforward, non-conspiratorial explanation: they let the guns walk in order to identify bigger fish rather than low-level traffickers. If it were drugs or money, this wouldn't be a big deal, but since we're talking about guns, it is a big deal, because guns kill people.

There are things that neither you nor I understand about F&F, but the mistake you (and others) are making is assuming that just because you aren't able to put the puzzle together, that it can't be put together at all (e.g. "well then YOU explain why there are no stars in any of the Apollo pictures they took on the moon! It's cause it DEFINITELY WASNT ON THE MOON!!!!!!!"). For example, I don't know why Mexico wasn't notified. Maybe they thought Mexico would have the operation shut down. Maybe they were afraid of leaks. Or, as happens frequently in this sort of situation, something that neither of us has thought of. But the fact that we don't yet know the details doesn't even come close to proving that it was anything more than a gun tracking operation gone awry.


There's a huge problem with the gun tracking theory. We know, from Congressional testimony, that this operation involved the at least the FBI, DEA, DHS, ICE, and the IRS. Given the massive amount of resources allocated to this it seems absolutely preposterous that no one would have taken the steps necessary to actually track the firearms across the border. But we know from Congressional testimony that that is exactly the case - there was no attempt to track the firearms once they left the United States.

The rest, as I said before, is speculation.

But given all the easy facts I provided previously, it is easy to see why there is such speculation.

But it is a virtual certainty that this was not a gun tracking operation. You've got at least 5 major government organizations - organizations that are supposed to be working much more closely together since 9/11 - all involved in an operation that made no attempt to actually track the guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 08:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
21. Really , tracking operation gone awry?
doesn't even come close to proving that it was anything more than a gun tracking operation gone awry.

A tracking operation implies, some mechanism for actually tracking the guns. The fact is , there was no mechanism in place to track them, unless you want to make us all believe, that confiscating guns at crime scenes is "tracking".

To call this program of gun running, a "gun tracking operation" is ridiculous beyond belief.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:22 PM
Response to Reply #12
24. Actually, what we do know
Is that BATF allowed guns to be straw purchased and moved into Mexico with absolutely no plan and no intent to track the weapons. Why they did this is the question that needs to be answered.

Can you come up with a logical explanation for why the feds would facilitate the transfer of over 2000 weapons and who knows how many grenades to gangs in Mexico?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 02:27 PM
Response to Original message
9. That's what I think too. Thanks for posting and subjecting yourself to wrath of the gun obsessed.
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 02:29 PM by Hoyt

"The truth is, the right has fixated on Fast and Furious not because it wants the federal government to become more effective in its efforts to stop gunrunning across the Mexican border. Quite the contrary. It wants to raise such a stink about Fast and Furious that the government is forced to stop undercover gun-trafficking investigations altogether. They see this as an opportunity to discredit and handcuff ATF, an agency that the NRA and others view as a hated enemy."


That nails it and anyone reading this forum objectively knows it. Apparently, the critics are mostly right wingers and a very small subset of Democrats who have a similar view of guns in our society.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #9
10. Explain to me
How the sting was supposed to work? There was never any plan to track the weapons after they crossed the border. NONE, zero, nada, zilch!

In the EARLIER operation called "Wide Receiver" the plan was to use RFID transmitters hidden in the arms shipments to track their movements. The smugglers outfoxed them. They drove around for the time they figured the surveillance aircraft could stay aloft, then dashed across the border. When the ATF figured out they had been played, the operation was stopped.

Now, one more time slowly, a sting operation requires you to track the contraband up the chain of supply to find the bigger fish. If there is no plan to track the weapons after they cross the border what is the point?

"Fast & Furious" was a "sting operation" right up until guns crossed the border without surveillance and no way of knowing where they would wind up. The Mexican authorities couldn't pick up surveillance, they were deliberately not informed, violating only a few "minor laws and treaties."

"Wide Receiver" was botched. The Feds failed to give the smugglers credit for coming up with a way to defeat the high tech tracking. The most generous thing you could say about "Fast and Furious" was that it was ill-conceived. What blew it open was career ATF agents blowing the whistle when they were ordered to let weapons cross the border knowing there was no way to track them.

Again, there can be no 'sting' without surveillance. As they did, on purpose, do exactly that, please explain to me:

WHO IS STUPID ENOUGH TO THINK THAT ALLOWING GUNS ACROSS THE BORDER WITH NO WAY TO TRACK THEM?IS A GOOD IDEA?



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 05:11 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Objectively?
I seriously doubt any of us are objective.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:19 AM
Response to Reply #11
32. Not when it comes to your precious guns -- that's for sure.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:12 PM
Response to Reply #9
16. So you don't believe that people died as a result of the ATF operation, or that
the ATF violated U.S. law, Mexican law, and international law? You believe none of that despite the evidence and testimony from those involved?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:33 PM
Response to Reply #16
19. "Pay no attention to that man behind the curtain!" They protest too much, methinks
Time to double down on the investigation.

You notice how, as more details are revealed, the louder and shriller the calls of "It's an NRA plot" get?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:12 AM
Response to Reply #16
30. I believe gun trafficking in this country is out of control. That's why it was done.

Fortunately, those who might have been killed -- and I doubt it is anywhere near the number you want it to be -- were likely drug traffickers. And, even if the guns hadn't gotten to Mexico through the botched ATF sting, some of you might well have sold em the same guns in a back alley. Most of you guys go out of your way to avoid background checks and all that.

But, whatever, none of you gun toters care about innocent people killed because of all the guns they keep pumping out in this country to fulfill your bad habits.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:43 AM
Response to Reply #30
33. For the Nth time Hoyt, This was NO botched sting.
There was NO mechanism in place to MAKE IT A STING.

That BY DEFINITION, makes it something else.


So stop already with the calling it something it wasnt - a sting.

As to the rest of what you wrote...its speaks more to your character than to anyone elses.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 11:55 AM
Response to Reply #33
43. So, I am not an apologist for the so-called "gun culture."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:24 PM
Response to Reply #43
61. Perhaps not, but you are a denier of reality, where F&F is concerned. N/T
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:59 PM
Response to Reply #30
55. Oh boy, this is going to have to go line by line I guess.
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 02:02 PM by Hoopla Phil
Fortunately, those who might have been killed -- and I doubt it is anywhere near the number you want it to be -- were likely drug traffickers.

I'm confused. Are you saying that Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry "may" not have really been killed, or that he was a drug trafficker? Please cite your evidence for either. Also, I do not want anyone murdered as a result of this ATF operation. See, I'M not the one trying to give the ATF a pass on it.


And, even if the guns hadn't gotten to Mexico through the botched ATF sting,

As has been pointed out to you numerous times, this was no botched sting. If such is the case please provide the mechanism that was to be used for actually tracking the guns after crossing the border.


some of you might well have sold em the same guns in a back alley.

Let me get this right. You are accusing members of DU of engaging in illegal arms dealing? Please cite your evidence.


Most of you guys go out of your way to avoid background checks and all that.

Are you again accusing members of DU of engaging in illegal activity? First we sell them illegally, now we buy them illegally? Please make up your mind in your accusations. Oh, and city your evidence please.


But, whatever

This would seem to try and discount your lack of any evidence for your outlandish (need I say libelous?) accusation.


none of you gun toters care about innocent people killed

Really? Just who is it wanting the investigations and who is it trying to give the ATF a pass for their alleged criminal activity that has lead to innocent people killed?

because of all the guns they keep pumping out in this country to fulfill your bad habits.

Just who is this "they" you mention? As far as "bad habits" goes, I consider my 2A interests and freedoms (you know, the ones that SCOTUS called a fundamental civil right) a rather good habit.


So now back to my original questions. You don't believe that anyone was killed as a result of the ATF operation (well, at least not innocent people). So how about the rest of my questions? Do you believe that ATF violated U.S. law, Mexican law, and international law?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:26 PM
Response to Reply #9
18. I'm old enough to remember when certain persons were very emphatic about describing Watergate as
Edited on Fri Oct-14-11 06:35 PM by friendly_iconoclast
a "third-rate burglary". Or when Eugene Hasenfuss crashed a C-119 in Central America.

I'm getting the same vibes again. The more people keep pulling at loose threads, the more certain parties complain...
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 06:54 PM
Response to Reply #9
20.  Hoyt, you also believe that a red dot sight is for long range sniping. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:07 AM
Response to Reply #20
28. You believe red dots are to help you clear a room -- like you'd ever need to do that in your wildest

gun fantasy.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:11 AM
Response to Reply #28
29. why would we have to clear a room?
Remember, there are some here that are cops, and they might have to. Took a class on it when I was in Combat Camera, but what was your point again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 11:51 AM
Response to Reply #29
41. If ;you are acting in the capacity of a policeman, no problem from me.

We are talking about private citizens acting like policeman -- is that a "wannabe" or something?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:42 PM
Response to Reply #41
51. wannabe what?
If you are asking why I took the class, it was because the powers that be thought it would be a good idea to teach us that. In case a photographer would be sent to a security or infantry unit or something.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Katya Mullethov Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 07:34 AM
Response to Reply #28
38. Old and busted =Clearing a room
New hotness = Dropping a SWAT stack .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 11:52 AM
Response to Reply #38
42. That's what some gunner here said was the purpose of his red dot sights. BS I know, but he said it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:44 PM
Response to Reply #42
52. Got a link to this claimed post? We'll wait, as you have a donor star and can easily search for it.
...if it actually exists.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 10:54 AM
Response to Reply #52
87.  You must be kidding!!!!
Hoyt said it, therefore it MUST be true, because HOYT said it. If HOYT had NOT said it then it because HOYT does not believe that it should be said!

Besides HOYT does not have to cite evidence on anything he says, because HOYT said it and HOYT is the final word on anything HOYT says.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas



Just in case it is needed :sarcasm:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 02:23 PM
Response to Reply #87
91. Yeah, but it's just another example of his mouth writing a check that his ass can't cash n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Straw Man Donating Member (986 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 01:00 PM
Response to Reply #91
99. Yes, like "dodge and shoot."
I'm still waiting for the cite on that one.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:53 PM
Response to Reply #42
77. Here, I'll attempt to educate you.
A "red dot" sight is a tool that enables one to ensure they hit their target, and only their target.

It is, in the hands of the lawful citizen, a safety device, meant to ensure one doesn't shoot wildly, or the wrong target.

Thus endeth the lesson.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #28
100.  No, not a fantasy. Done it numerous times for real. Urban combat is not
for keyboard commandos or elitist twits.

In other words, if you ain't been there, done that, then shut the fuck up.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 08:40 PM
Response to Reply #9
22. So the folks who blew the whistle on this
You know,, actual ATF agents, who were forced to let guns walk across the border, over their own objections. Yeah, these guys really want to raise such a stink about Fast and Furious that the government is forced to stop undercover gun-trafficking investigations altogether.

Who do you think brought this issue to light? Rep Issa? Sheryl Atkisson? Senator Grassley? ,, no it was ATF agents blowing the whistle on
their own agency, and the Justice dept. These agents knew that crimes were being committed and they were being forced to be a part of it.

You can accuse the right and a small subset of Democrats of fixating on Fast and Furious, and you would be right. Many of us don't like it when our own government breaks its own laws.

The real question is, why would ANYONE, regardless of political affiliation, defend this program, unless their agenda, was more important, than
seeing criminals masquerading as government officals being brought to justice.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:18 AM
Response to Reply #22
31. No one is defending it. But gunners' attempts to bring down the whole administration is misplaced

hatred/fear of anything related to gun enforcement. Issa, etc., are just on a witch hunt to get Obama's Administration. And gunners here cheer them on.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:45 AM
Response to Reply #31
34. "No one is defending it" but those who investigate it are " on a witch hunt"
If only our government were as transparent.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
one-eyed fat man Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 08:04 AM
Response to Reply #31
39. What we want is answers
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 08:06 AM by one-eyed fat man
This was not a rogue operation of one field office of the ATF. Newell, the Agent in Charge, when the street agents complained about letting the smugglers cross the border, told them the operation had been cleared up the chain to Washington. Unlike you, they knew there could be no sting without surveillance. No matter how many times and by how many people it has been pointed out to you, you steadfastly refuse to acknowledge the fatal flaw in the whole Fast and Furious operation.

So who approved it? The Director of the ATF said it came from above him. Who does ATF work for? Justice. Who is the AG? Holder.

The FBI had some involvement, they do the NICS checks. ATF has dealers to make sales to straw buyers and the FBI dummies the NICS checks. Who does the FBI work for? Justice. Who is the AG? Holder

He's got some 'splaining to do, Lucy.

Field agents have risked their careers going to the media with their complaints. The Director of the ATF points the finger at Justice and is "reassigned." The US Attorney for Arizona is forced to resign. The NSA staffer in the White House who was getting back channel briefings from Newell is suddenly transferred to Iraq.

Why do you not only keep acting like you were born at night, but that it was last night?





Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:29 PM
Response to Reply #31
56. "No one is defending it." Really?
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...
Looks like someone is making a lot of excuses to me.

Oh, and by the by. Why is it that the 2A supporters are the ones wanting an investigation into what appears to be violations of U.S. law, Mexican law, and international law while the 2A prohibitionists are trying to give that ATF a pass?

Just who is it that wants to make sure innocent life is not lost again?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Abq_Sarah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:37 PM
Response to Reply #9
27. You are mistaken, dear
Millions of Democrats own firearms.

Personally, I don't believe anyone who doesn't support the Bill of Rights should insult the rest of us by calling themselves Democrats.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 11:48 AM
Response to Reply #27
40. Oh, you must be in a militia. I support the ACLU position on guns, particularly toting in public.

If you leave your guns at home, won't hear a lot of criticism from me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:28 PM
Response to Reply #40
47. Do also support the ACLU
position on Citizens United vs FEC?
Their position on guns has no historical or judicial basis. Their position on Citizens United is a big wet kiss to Dick Armey and the Kochs.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
tortoise1956 Donating Member (403 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:58 PM
Response to Reply #40
54. I support the ACLU position also. See the link below
http://www.aclunv.org/aclu-nevada-supports-individual%E...

Any other specious crap you want to drop off as you troll through the gun forum?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:46 PM
Response to Reply #54
66. I support their National Policy on guns -- which will make many of you pucker.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 07:26 AM
Response to Reply #9
37. Thank you Hoyt. You have nailed the critical bullshit of Bookman's piece.

"The truth is, the right has fixated on Fast and Furious not because it wants the federal government to become more effective in its efforts to stop gunrunning across the Mexican border. Quite the contrary. It wants to raise such a stink about Fast and Furious that the government is forced to stop undercover gun-trafficking investigations altogether. They see this as an opportunity to discredit and handcuff ATF, an agency that the NRA and others view as a hated enemy."

Or maybe lawful citizens don't want to see their liberties curtailed in the name of security. The ATF is not being handcuffed. They are simply being held accountable. I realize that this ATF fiasco is causing great pain for those who would like to curtail civil liberties, but they can deal with it.







Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
spin Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:14 PM
Response to Reply #9
60. Of course you qualify as a human attempting to imitate an ostrich ....
by burying your head in the sand. And you are doing an excellent job.



Walk into your bathroom, look into the mirror and ask yourself if you would have felt the same had this scandal broke during the Bush administration. Stare directly into your reflection and tell yourself that this fiasco which led to the death of at least one American law enforcement officer and possibly as many as 200 Mexicans has been blown out of proportion by gun owners who want to make the ATF look bad.

And the idea for this foolish and illegal scheme did start in the Bush Administration.

But of course you will continue to support the ATF management because you feel that the NRA and gun owners hate them. Have you even considered that gun owners and the NRA may actually have legitimate reasons to dislike the management of the ATF when those in charge feel they can do whatever they damn well please as they are above the law.

It was the hard working and honest ATF agents who work on the street who broke this scandal, not the NRA.

I don't give a shit what side of the gun control issue a person is on, nor do I care whether you are liberal, conservative or a Tea Bagger. Any and all American citizens should be concerned that agencies of our government would allow dangerous criminals to illegally buy large quantifies of lethal weapons and smuggle them to a neighboring country for delivery to a drug cartel with a long record of killing innocent people.

You must be one of those fools who believe that the end justifies the means. I was talking to a person the other day about this scandal and when I mentioned that possibly 200 Mexicans had died as a result, she stunned me when she said she didn't give a damn about dead Mexicans.



Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:05 PM
Response to Reply #60
73. At least I just stick my head in the sand.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:20 PM
Response to Reply #73
76.  Hoyt, that is not sand you are sticking your head into. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:56 PM
Response to Reply #76
79. Yeah.... warmer, wetter and more odorous... n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #79
81. Appreciate the first hand info.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
oneshooter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 10:56 AM
Response to Reply #81
88.  You can google insructions for safe removal. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
PavePusher Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 10:59 AM
Response to Reply #81
89. We are talking to you....
from the outside....
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Straw Man Donating Member (986 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 09:35 PM
Response to Original message
23. A big fat Scotsman...
...fallacy, from headline to toe. What else you got?

ATF should ask the DEA for some pointers. First rule: You don't actually let the trafficker get away with the goods. If you do, you're part of the problem.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Kennah Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:24 PM
Response to Original message
25. F&F ranges from dumb-assed to criminal
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
rl6214 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-14-11 10:29 PM
Response to Original message
26. It's got nothing to do with these right wing conspiracies and everything
to do with the coverup that has followed this story breaking in the news. Come clean and there is not as much of a problem, lie about it and try to divert the info from getting out the problem just grows and grows.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Tejas Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 06:02 AM
Response to Original message
35. You would be laughed off of CUATF.org
Bill Newell, is that you?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 07:19 AM
Response to Original message
36. 

That some people are holding the ATF accountable should not surprise any ethical person.

That some people are using it to attack the administration should not surprise any person who pays attention to politics. The ATF handed the right wing a great big pile of ammo.

The administration will ride this one out. There won't be impeachment. But the administration should send the ATF a clear message not to fuck up like this again.


Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:35 PM
Response to Reply #36
44. Well, they've indicted over 30 suspects who were trafficking guns -- that sounds pretty good to me.
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 12:38 PM by Hoyt

Obviously gunners here don't like the government arresting gun traffickers.


Further, here are some excerpts from article in Christian Science Monitor that I think is pretty good (I doubt gunners will think so though):

. . . . . . the saga of Fast and Furious has underscored a number of troubling trends on the US-Mexico border:

The role US borderland gun shops play in feeding the regions drug-related violence.

How Mexicos ruthless crime gangs use the weakly regulated US market to arm themselves.

How the American gun lobbys opposition to regulation has stifled government efforts to plug the flow of arms into Mexico."


. . . . . .The only way to stop, or more realistically slow down, the weapons trafficking will be through enhanced intelligence and undercover operations, and increased cross-border cooperation, says Eric Olson, a senior associate at the Woodrow Wilson Centers Mexico Institute in Washington. But if the result of this scandal is to pull back on all of that, he adds, the problem will continue to grow.

http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Foreign-Policy/2011/0621/H...


In addition to the indictments that have already occurred, more are expected.

Some ATF officials still insist that Fast and Furious is a success, saying the case will soon lead to the indictment of as many as two dozen high-level traffickers. They fear the controversy could rob the agency of the will to pursue the biggest gun-trafficking cases. I am concerned that the lasting effect of this premature and stilted inquiry will be that the citizens of this country ultimately will be less safe as ATF agents will be less inclined to work the hard cases necessary to cut off the head of the snake, said Paul Pelletier, a former Justice official and the attorney for Newell. The shame of it is that the careers of these terrific public servants have been unfairly tarnished at the expense of public theater.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/investigations/us-anti-gu...


Truthfully, if you love guns more than almost anything, you like seeing the ATF twisting in the wind. On the other hand, if you think gun trafficking needs to be curtailed, you'll wait until the results are in, indictments are issued, and drug cartels are busted along with those who illegally ran guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:13 PM
Response to Reply #44
46. You really love the "you're either with us or against" posturing, dont you?


If anything the data show that a majority of the guns used in cartels shootings are not from US gun stores.

This means that the CSM, the WW Mexico Institute and you can just stop grandstanding about actually trying to say lives.

Cartel shooting victims are just another excuse to curtail civil liberties of US citizens and residents. Its a culture war move.

Are you really that naive to think that F&F will bust up the cartels. Yeah, don't hold your breath...

The ATF can investigate and arrest illegal gun running without letting guns go across with little tracking and having one end up being used against our own law enforcement.




Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:36 PM
Response to Reply #46
48. Like I said and you confirmed, any threat to the gun pipeline worries you guys.

I think this was a legitimate investigation, and more needs to be done because of trafficking in this country and Mexico.

I'm "naive enough" to believe that this sting and others will produce results and new ways of combating this and other gun trafficking right here in this country. I'm sorry for anyone that got shot, especially our agents. Maybe this would be a good time for you to repeat the BS that "guns don't kill."

Besides 30 or so indictments ain't a bad start.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
aikoaiko Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:47 PM
Response to Reply #48
59. Well, we agree that more needs to be done to stop gun running into Mexico.

30 indictments is great, but it came at a great cost of credibility to the ATF and maybe some dead people.

Even Bookman calls F&F a serious law enforcement mistake. But I get it. If you hate US gun laws, these kind of mistakes are the price to be paid.

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:36 PM
Response to Reply #59
62. Too bad you don't look at guns in public the same way when they contribute to deaths..

The moral outrage against ATF is misplaced.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:11 PM
Response to Reply #62
70. Violations of law should be prosecuted. Do you believe that the ATF
violated the law in their operations?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:40 PM
Response to Reply #44
50. "they've indicted over 30 suspects
who were trafficking guns was that before or after they let the guns get trafficked into Mexico with no chance of tracking them further?
These men could have been stopped at any time after they purchased the guns, and still indicted.

Some ATF officials still insist that Fast and Furious is a success, saying the case will soon lead to the indictment of as many as two dozen high-level traffickers.

Hmm, a few dozen traffickers at the low low cost of only a couple hundred dead Mexicans and one dead Border Patrol agent,and counting.

Do you suppose that we should all hope for more ATF success? What will the death toll be for their future successes?

You really don't get it do you, has anyone here posted anything, disaproving of the ATF arresting illegal gun traffickers?

I sure haven't seen any, what i have seen is people like me who are not willing to call 200+ dead people for a small number arrested a success.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:49 PM
Response to Reply #50
53. Why, that's less than four deaths per indictment! I can't understand why people are complaining...
<is a sarcasm tag realy neccessary?>
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:38 PM
Response to Reply #50
63. Again, too bad you don't express the same moral outrage when some gun nut kills someone.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #63
69. Again, do you believe that the ATF violated U.S. laws, Mexican laws, and/or International laws
in this program to arm the cartels? Mexico at least thinks they violated their laws as they want extraditions of those agents involved for trial. Do you support Mexico's sovereignty in this issue?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 12:40 PM
Response to Original message
45. Story needs update to include "sane" outlook on walking grenades. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 01:37 PM
Response to Reply #45
49. You mean the guy who was made an informant.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:34 PM
Response to Reply #49
57. And exported the parts for 2,000 grenades:
Per CBS News:

"Police say Jean Baptiste Kingery, a U.S. citizen, was a veritable grenade machine. He's accused of smuggling parts for as many as 2,000 grenades into Mexico for killer drug cartels -- sometimes under the direct watch of U.S. law enforcement."

But there appears to be a hitch in detaining/arresting Kingery...

"Law enforcement sources say Kingery could have been prosecuted in the U.S. twice for violating export control laws, but that, each time, prosecutors in Arizona refused to make a case."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 02:38 PM
Response to Reply #57
58. Some people really do believe that you can't make an omelet without
breading a few eggs. I don't know what disturbs me more. That actions of the ATF, or their defenders.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:40 PM
Response to Reply #58
65. Too bad you don't get enraged when some gun nut shoots someone without reason.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:01 PM
Response to Reply #65
67. LOL, "gun nut". How quaint. Say, don't you have some questions to answer?
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 04:03 PM by Hoopla Phil
Must have struck a nerve with about the defenders of the ATF operation. Too bad you don't get enraged when criminal activity by the ATF results in deaths of innocents. Oh wait, you don't believe that anyone died as a result of the ATF operation - at least not innocent lives. Do I have that right? Think close cause I can cite it. . .
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:04 PM
Response to Reply #65
72. Do you get enraged when someone gets busted w/ child porn on their computer?
If not, why not? You're a computer owner just like they are, so you're just as responsible for them as gun owners are when someone
else uses a gun in a crime.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:07 PM
Response to Reply #72
74. I do get enraged, and I see no reason to have such photos at home or strapped to my body.

You guys are really pitiful.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 08:08 PM
Response to Reply #74
92. You never did answer those questions
Speaking of really pitiful. :rofl:
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 03:39 PM
Response to Reply #57
64. Yep, they were trying to get to the people who ordered the use of deadly weapons.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoopla Phil Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #64
68. By giving them deadly weapons? How did that work out again?
Oh yeah, violations of U.S. law, Mexican law, and international law. As long as it's for a cause YOU support right? What's the worth of a few lives in the big picture?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 06:29 PM
Response to Reply #64
71. No .. they really wern't
If they were, they would have had a tracking mechanism in place before the guns crossed the border, as you have been told more than
once in this thread alone, they simply didn't have any way to track the guns once they entered Mexico.

You apparently have missed that point, over and over, and are still defending this gun running program. Why?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:09 PM
Response to Reply #71
75. Thye've already indicted over 30 of them. They'll get more if you gunners would quit whining about

the government trying to protect our hemisphere from those that can't live without guns.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sat Oct-15-11 10:55 PM
Response to Reply #75
78. well, they are doing a lousy job
Edited on Sat Oct-15-11 10:57 PM by gejohnston
How about protecting our hemisphere from those who can't live without dope? Without their money, the gangs would not exist let alone kill each other over market share and trade routes. Blame NAFTA, the war on drugs, greed, or smokers being too lazy to grow their own. I don't do drugs, don't sell drugs, don't sell guns to drug dealers. Why should my rights be curtailed because of a problem I do not contribute to? You and I both know many of the same people wringing their hands are fueling the problem with their money.
edit to add: who are those thirty people? Who arrested them and for what? Why did they let the ones go across the border without letting Mexican officials in on it?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #78
80. With no help from the "gun culture."
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 12:34 AM
Response to Reply #80
82. you forget
Edited on Sun Oct-16-11 12:38 AM by gejohnston
FFLs were calling the cops on these guys until the ATF stepped in and said, "it is OK, they are with us." So don't feed me that shit, I doubt you even believe that. The gun culture is not the problem, it is the drug culture. They would still get their guns the same place they get most of them now gun culture or not. Without the drug culture, they would not exist. When are the bong owners going to take responsibility?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
beevul Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 05:18 AM
Response to Reply #82
83. I disagree.
Neither the gun culture nor the drug culture is to blame.


The prohibition culture owns it.


All of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Hoyt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 10:19 AM
Response to Reply #82
86. Some were. Some were selling with a big grin on their face and cash in their pocket.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Oneka Donating Member (319 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 07:37 AM
Response to Reply #75
85. And how many
Edited on Sun Oct-16-11 07:38 AM by Oneka
of those first 30 are the 'BIG FISH" , you know the ones that live and operate down in Mexico, where the ATF has no jurisdiction?

You know that the only way to arrest them is with Mexico's help right? of course we had a plan for that didn't we?


Oh thats right ,, we had NO FUCKING PLAN to get to the "BIG FUCKING FISH", since the Mexican officials were never informed.

So lets lets sum up once again for the willfully ignorant. We have indicted around 30 low level gun buyers, that we most likely could have arrested the same day they made their first bulk purchase, or at worse, interdicted at the border when the guns walked across.

All this at the STILL very low cost of letting upwards of 2500 guns walk into mexico, Two dead americans, and scores of dead Mexicans.


Hoyt, if you really want me to, i will stop whining today, but i will start whining again when YOU decide the death toll becomes even too high
for you to stomach.

On second thought, i won't let your agenda drive my desire to see, NO MORE people die, due to this criminal program. So i will WHINE to whoever will listen,& i will send letters to my congressmen, and ask them to make sure that congress does its job and gets to the bottom of this criminal activity. While i whine and send e-mails, and make phone calls, you can BITCH all you want about us gunners who don't care about human life, but we will both know the truth of it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
Euromutt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 06:49 AM
Response to Original message
84. If you have to use an ad hominem in the title to make your point, I'd say your point sucks
Essentially, Mr. Bookman is saying, if your reading of the "Fast & Furious" debacle differs from his, you must be insane. Bluntly, he can go fuck himself. His position isn't helped by the occasional (not-quite-)half-truth and false equivalency. For example:
Inevitably, what did he know and when did he know it also becomes an issue in such investigations. In May, the attorney general testified to Issas committee that he first became aware of the program and its difficulties this spring. Issa has since released documents indicating that information about Fast and Furious had been sent to Holder back in 2010. That has led to claims that Holder committed perjury and is conducting a coverup.

It turns out, however, that Issa himself was also briefed on Fast and Furious back in 2010. His spokesman, Frederick Hill, admits the session occurred but says that the briefing was broad my understanding is that Fast and Furious never came up by name in this briefing, and certainly they had no discussion about the controversial tactics.

And thats pretty much the explanation that Holders spokesman gives as well, citing the volume of material that crosses an attorney generals desk: <...>

There is, however, a small but important difference between Issa and Holder, namely that Holder is the Attorney-General, and thus has what those of us in the war crimes prosecution business call "command responsibility" for the actions of the ATF. It's not enough for Holder to say he didn't know, because he had the responsibility to know. And in the event he was being misled or kept in the dark by his subordinates, he should have undertaken disciplinary action against those subordinates as soon as he became aware of the matter (as opposed to, say, trying to orchestrate a cover-up). The fact that some congressman wasn't fully apprised of the matter doesn't excuse the Attorney-General of the United States, because in the case of the latter, it's his damn job to know!

So far, some 65,000 guns confiscated in Mexico by authorities have been traced back to gun purchases made here in the United States.

I'm pretty certain that's not correct, not least because the total number of guns recovered from narcotraficantes during 2009 and 2010 combined was ~29,000, and another ~50,000 in the two years before that. Now if you interpret the oft-repeated claim that "80% of firearms recovered in Mexico and submitted to the ATF for tracing" were traced to US sources as referring those ~80,000 recovered guns, then you'd arrive at .8 x 80,000 = 64,000, as close to 65,000 as makes little odds. But you'd be wrong, because it's not 80% of total guns recovered, it's 80% of guns submitted to the ATF for tracing, and that's only a fraction of the total recovered. Moreover, there's no reason to assume the guns submitted to the ATF are a representative sample of the total, because guns that are manufactured or imported into the U.S. have the manufacturer's or importer's name stamped on them, are thus readily identifiable as having passed through the American system, and should therefore receive priority in being submitted to the ATF (which, after all, has no legal authority over weapons that haven't originated in or passed through the American firearms market).

The undercover aspect of the operation is particularly galling to the NRA because it recalls sting operations conducted by New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others. In those operations, private detectives went to gun shops and gun shows and were sold guns even though they told the gun sellers that they werent legally eligible to buy weapons.

I watched a number of those O'Keefe-like exercises, and the private dicks were very careful never to actually state explicitly that they weren't legally eligible to purchase a firearm. What they would say was something along the lines of "I probably wouldn't be able to pass a background check" which is by no means the same thing, since it's quite possible to fail to pass a NICS check through no fault of your own (e.g. because your name and physical characteristics match or resemble those of a known prohibited person).

And ironically, Bloomberg's stunts didn't honk off the NRA anywhere near as much as they honked off the ATF. On more than one occasion, Bloomberg's antics alerted traffickers whom the ATF was investigating causing them to change up their methods.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
SteveM Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Oct-16-11 02:19 PM
Response to Original message
90. CBS done gone nuts! nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
chrisa Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Oct-21-11 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
94. Next up: Giving Al Qaeda stinger missiles as part of an undercover operation.
'But we bet it will go well. There's absolutely nothing that could go wrong!'
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
friendly_iconoclast Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed Dec-07-11 10:37 PM
Response to Original message
95. UPDATE: "Documents: ATF used "Fast and Furious" to make the case for gun regulations"
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695...


ATF officials didn't intend to publicly disclose their own role in letting Mexican cartels obtain the weapons, but emails show they discussed using the sales, including sales encouraged by ATF, to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". That would require some U.S. gun shops to report the sale of multiple rifles or "long guns." Demand Letter 3 was so named because it would be the third ATF program demanding gun dealers report tracing information.


"Lunacy", eh?
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
gejohnston Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 06:08 PM
Response to Reply #95
96. Damn those crickets are loud
This is not a good time for the other team's star players to be missing.
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
burf Donating Member (745 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Dec-09-11 02:02 PM
Response to Reply #95
101. Not much activity in the day and a half
since you put it up.

One thing has got me thinking though. With all the numbers floating around on the number of weapons that wound up in Mexico that made in the USA, how many got there through the State Department Direct Commercial Sales Program? Would these being considered? According to the El Paso Times, last year $416.5 million was spent on the program. What are the safeguards and accountability measures to ensure these weapons are not falling into the hands of the cartels? We already know the Mexican Army has a desertion problem and much of the Mexican police forces are corrupt, so what's stopping this from happening?

Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
slackmaster Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Thu Dec-08-11 06:10 PM
Response to Original message
97. I found a photographic representation of this opinion piece
Printer Friendly | Permalink | Reply | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Fri Nov 15th 2019, 07:49 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Topic Forums » Guns Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC