or Connect
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Obama Puts Guns in Hands of Mexican Drug Cartels
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Obama Puts Guns in Hands of Mexican Drug Cartels - Page 2

post #16 of 129
Quote:
KING: It begs the question, how did the president know about this in March, and how did the president know the attorney general knew nothing about this in march, when the attorney general says in May he just learned about it a couple weeks ago?

That doesn't mean what he thinks it means.
post #17 of 129
When does the shoe or body drop?
post #18 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

When does the shoe or body drop?

This story just makes your blood boil, don't it? A Republican AG would make those bandits buy their own guns WITHOUT any government assistance. THAT'S the American way.
post #19 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by meister View Post

When does the shoe or body drop?

Latest is that Fast and Furious was a (disastrous) attempt at pushing an anti-gun control agenda. Another classic Bam stuff up.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-57338546-10391695/documents-atf-used-fast-and-furious-to-make-the-case-for-gun-regulations/
post #20 of 129
Only a matter of time . . .

The press has done a fantastic job ignoring this story, but they can't contain it. Its bigger than they are.

Cover ups are almost always worse than the crime, but Holder's refusal to hand over the crates and caskets of smoking guns may be his best play under the circumstances.
post #21 of 129
Some cons floated a theory that Fast and Furious was a cyncial, calculated attempt to impose new gun control laws. I was on the fence, because I thought no one, not even Eric Holder, could be that stupid and sociopathic. So, a dead DEA agent and a pile of dead Mexicans later, enter the ghouls of the Obama administration:
Quote:
President Barack Obama has threatened to veto a Department of Justice appropriations bill House Republicans passed because, among other things, it includes a provision that blocks a gun control law his administration used Operation Fast and Furious to pass.

The Obama administration’s Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives wrote, and began implementing, a new rule that would require gun dealers in the four U.S. states that border Mexico to report sales of multiple semi-automatic rifles to the ATF.

In the 2013 fiscal year budget for the Department of Justice and related agencies, House Republicans inserted a rider, or condition, that would force the ATF to not implement that rule.

In a statement the White House released upon receiving the House appropriations bill, the administration threatened it would veto the legislation because of that ATF rider, among other things.

In the statement, the White House called that rider blocking the ATF rule’s implementation one of the few it “strongly opposes” because the Obama administration thinks it represents “problematic policy and language riders that have no place in funding legislation.”

Several House Republicans have charged that the Obama administration had an anti-gun agenda when it carried out Fast and Furious, and are particularly wary of Attorney General Eric Holder, who once expressed the need to “brainwash” the American people into disliking firearm ownership.

They cite emails CBS News acquired in December, in which lead Fast and Furious Agent Bill Newell and ATF Field Operations Assistant Director Mark Chait discussed how to use the scandal’s aftermath to promote the long-gun reporting requirement for multiple sales.

“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,’” CBS News’ Sharyl Attkisson reported in December. “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.” (VIDEO: Chaffetz to Dems on Fast and Furious: Have ‘guts’ to take on Holder)

Democratic politicians have also invoked Fast and Furious when pushing for stricter gun control laws. During an early November 2011 Senate Judiciary Committee hearing, California Democratic Sen. Dianne Feinstein tried to leverage the crisis to push for anti-gun regulations.

“My concern, Mr. Chairman, is there’s been a lot said about Fast and Furious, and perhaps mistakes were made, but I think this hunt for blame doesn’t really speak about the problem,” Feinstein said during a Nov. 1 hearing. “And the problem is, anybody can walk in and buy anything: .50-caliber weapons, sniper weapons, buy them in large amounts and send them down to Mexico. So, the question really becomes, what do we do about this?”

“I’ve been here 18 years,” Feinstein continued. “I’ve watched the BATF get beaten up at every turn on the road. And, candidly, it’s just not right.”

During that hearing, Feinstein advocated for using Operation Fast and Furious as a springboard from which to advocate for strict gun control laws, including national databases and government-controlled firearms registration. She argued that new laws could prevent future programs like Fast and Furious from reaching maturity.


Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2012/05/09/obama-threatens-to-veto-doj-budget-because-it-blocks-fast-and-furious-gun/?intcmp=obinsite#ixzz1wZQ8xuUE
post #22 of 129

The first known ATF "gunwalking" operation to Mexican drug cartels, named Operation Wide Receiver, began in early 2006 and ran into late 2007. Licensed dealer Mike Detty informed the ATF of a suspicious gun purchase that took place in February 2006 in Tucson, Arizona. In March he was hired as a confidential informant working with the ATF's Tucson office, part of their Phoenix, Arizona field division.[23] With the use of surveillance equipment, ATF agents monitored additional sales by Detty to straw purchasers. With assurance from ATF "that Mexican officials would be conducting surveillance or interdictions when guns got to the other side of the border",[24] Detty would sell a total of about 450 guns during the operation.[22] These included AR-15s, semi-automatic AK-pattern rifles, and Colt .38s. The vast majority of the guns were eventually lost as they moved into Mexico.

 

 

At the time, under the Bush administration Department of Justice (DOJ), no arrests or indictments were made. After President Barack Obama took office in 2009, the DOJ reviewed Wide Receiver in September 2009 and found that guns had been allowed into the hands of suspected gun traffickers. Indictments began in 2010, over three years after Wide Receiver concluded. As of October 4, 2011 (2011 -10-04), nine people had been charged with making false statements in acquisition of firearms and illicit transfer, shipment or delivery of firearms.  As of November, charges against one defendant had been dropped; five of them had pled guilty, and one had been sentenced to one year and one day in prison. Two of them remained fugitives.

 

 

Another, smaller probe occurred in 2007 under the same ATF Phoenix field division. It began when the ATF identified Mexican suspects who bought weapons from a Phoenix gun shop over a span of several months. The probe ultimately involved over 200 guns, a dozen of which were lost in Mexico. On September 27, 2007, ATF agents saw the original suspects buying weapons at the same store and followed them toward the Mexican border. The ATF informed the Mexican government when the suspects successfully crossed the border, but Mexican law enforcement were unable to track them.

 

Less than two weeks later, on October 6, William Newell, then ATF's special agent in charge of the Phoenix field division, shut down the operation at the behest of William Hoover, ATF's assistant director for the office of field operations.  No charges were filed. Newell, who was special agent in charge from June 2006 to May 2011, would later play a major role in Operation Fast and Furious.

 

 

 

this was a rouge operation by the AZ field office, even headed up by the same guy who did it for bush

the difference is obama prosecuted, bush did not

 

holder knew nothing, obama knew nothing

 

that is like saying the sec of defense should know what some infantry company in 'stan is doing, like pissing on corpses or an individual running amok killing babies

post #23 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur PE View Post


that is like saying the sec of defense should know what some infantry company in 'stan is doing, like pissing on corpses or an individual running amok killing babies

Or that a President should know enough about intelligence operations to know that information about weapons of mass destruction was incorrect. Just throwing examples out there.
post #24 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by FLMountainMan View Post


Or that a President should know enough about intelligence operations to know that information about weapons of mass destruction was incorrect. Just throwing examples out there.

 

he knew they were incorrect

his admin made them up as an excuse for war

 

big difference between an ATF field office operation of a dozen players

and a war involving millions of men and a tril dollars lasting 10 years initiated by the WH itself, not some low level LE officer

with much of the info coming from his security counsel and advisors, NOT the CIA/DIA/NSA

or cheney saying it would be over in 6 months and 50 bil, then firing a guy for saying it will be at least 100 bil

when all said and done, 2-3 tril

let alone the dead, >5000 US and 100,000's of civies

mission acomplished!!!!

just saying

post #25 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur PE View Post

he knew they were incorrect
his admin made them up as an excuse for war


Ladies and Gentlemen, they do exist!
post #26 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post


Ladies and Gentlemen, they do exist!

 

'made them up'

4. To devise as a fiction or falsehood; invent: made up an excuse.
 
not 'fabricate' or 'construct'
post #27 of 129
I sincerely enjoy how Arthur can indisputably prove, to himself at least, that everything bad is Bush's fault and everything good is Obama's doing. Life in Arthurville is always sunny.
post #28 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arthur PE View Post

'made them up'
4. To devise as a fiction or falsehood; invent: made up an excuse.
 
not 'fabricate' or 'construct'

I wasn't referring to WMDs. I was referring to folks who accept the rhetoric of political parties hook line and sinker. I've never heard anyone else on this forum actually declare Bush knew all along that Saddam was lying about WMDs, that he fabricated an elaborate scheme and that he successfully conned congressional democrats, Europe, and the UN.
post #29 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Piobaire View Post

I sincerely enjoy how Arthur can indisputably prove, to himself at least, that everyone bad is Bush's fault and everything good is Obama's doing. Life in Arthurville is always sunny.

 

not everything

he's not responsible for 911

but he is responsible for the Iraq fiasco/debaucle

and I did not say he was responsible for the gun running, just that this was an ongoing local op, and if discovered sooner, he probably would have prosecuted

 

but at least Arthurville is in reality

 

but you are correct, my life is sunny:: great wife, great kids, great career that I like doing, money is not a worry, my health is good (until recently never been in surgery/hospital, but had a little accident, great docs, and all is well), and going to Montreal F1 next week...the sun is definitely shining on me today, tomorrow, who knows

post #30 of 129
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lighthouse View Post


I wasn't referring to WMDs. I was referring to folks who accept the rhetoric of political parties hook line and sinker. I've never heard anyone else on this forum actually declare Bush knew all along that Saddam was lying about WMDs, that he fabricated an elaborate scheme and that he successfully conned congressional democrats, Europe, and the UN.

 

 

everybody rational or not a bushwhacker knows they were lying

colin powell said as much

 

it wasn't what hussein said, it was the data bush fabricated and the data he suppressed

 

I wouldn't call what he did a 'success', but he did 'con' them, but it was not a UN operation, it was US with paid for alliese happened regardless...

some argue he was not given authorization by the UN for war, some contend it was a crime

doesn't matter at this point, 5000+ Americans dead, 10 times as many maimed/crippled. 600,000 VA disabilities claims since 2002 and 2-3 tril when all is said and done

 

it's been done before

viet nam, cambodia, body counts...

 

yes based on lies, and possible illegalm the head of the UN said it was illegal

The then United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Annan said in September 2004 that: "From our point of view and the UN Charter point of view, it [the war] was illegal."[1][2] The Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court reported in February 2006 that he had received 240 communications in connection with the invasion of Iraq in March 2003 which alleged that various war crimes had been committed. The political leaders of the US and UK have argued the war was legal, while many legal experts and other international leaders have argued that it was illegal. US and UK officials have argued that existing UN Security Council resolutions related to the first Persian Gulf War and the subsequent ceasefire (660, 678), and to later inspections of Iraqi weapons programs (1441), had already authorized the invasion.[3]Critics of the invasion have challenged both of these assertions, arguing that an additional Security Council resolution, which the US and UK failed to obtain, would have been necessary to specifically authorize the invasion.

 

In November 2008, Lord Bingham of Cornhill, the former Lord Chief Justice and Senior Law Lord of the United Kingdom, stated that British Attorney General Lord Goldsmith's advice to the British Government contained "no hard evidence" that Iraq had defied UN resolutions "in a manner justifying resort to force" and that the invasion was "a serious violation of international law and of the rule of law."[50]

 

Richard Perle, a senior member of the Bush Administration's Defense Policy Board Advisory Committee, conceded in November 2003 that the invasion was illegal but still justified

 

Before the invasion, the then UK Attorney General Lord Goldsmith, advised that the war would be in breach of international law for six reasons, ranging from the lack of a second United Nations resolution to UN inspector Hans Blix's continuing search for weapons.[65] Ten days later on 7 March 2003, as UK troops were massing in Kuwait, Lord Goldsmith changed his mind, saying:

I remain of the opinion that the safest legal course would be to secure the adoption of a further resolution to authorise the use of force.... Nevertheless, having regard to the information on the negotiating history which I have been given and to the arguments of the US Administration which I heard in Washington, I accept that a reasonable case can be made that resolution 1441 is capable in principle of reviving the authorisation in 678 without a further resolution.[66]

He concluded his revised analysis by saying that "regime change cannot be the objective of military action."

 

On 1 May 2005, a related UK document known as the Downing Street memo, detailing the minutes of a meeting on 26 July 2002, was apparently leaked to The Sunday Times. The memo recorded the head of the Secret Intelligence Service (MI6) as expressing the view following his recent visit to Washington that "Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy." It also quoted Secretary of State for Foreign and Commonwealth Affairs (Foreign Secretary) Jack Straw as saying that it was clear that Bush had "made up his mind" to take military action but that "the case was thin", and the Attorney-General Goldsmith as warning that justifying the invasion on legal grounds would be difficult.

British officials did not dispute the document's authenticity

 

 

 

but none of that matters to the millions of lives shattered by this travesty

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Current Events, Power and Money
Styleforum › Forums › General › Current Events, Power and Money › Obama Puts Guns in Hands of Mexican Drug Cartels