Wednesday, July 27, 2011

Obama's 'Fast and Furious' Fiasco

Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
Brian Terry was a career border patrol agent who was attempting to perform his rather dangerous and thankless job when a Mexican national gunned him down with an AK-47.

The brazen, tragic loss of life was anticipated by Brian's fellow agents, who had been ordered to "stand down" and made to watch while large numbers of guns were ordered, purchased and carried over the border into Mexico. Rank and file Border Patrol agents out on the line were incredulous that all these guns were just being let loose into the hands of Mexican drug gangs who routinely murdered Mexican law enforcement, citizens and each other. It wasn't hard to guess the consequences of such a policy:
"At least 122 firearms from a botched U.S. undercover operation have been found at crime scenes in Mexico or intercepted en route to drug cartels there, according to a Republican congressional report being issued on Tuesday."
Purportedly the "higher ups" were interested in identifying and catching the Mexican criminals who would purchase such weapons, however, it turns out that the individuals were already known by the FBI, and that the weapons sold did nothing to change the dynamic with the Mexican drug gangs.

One theory is that the whole effort was to paint US gun laws as responsible for Mexican drug violence. Knowing the obvious risks, who then would come up with such an idiotic plan that put lives at risk for the purpose of tilting a political argument in their favor?
If "Operation Fast and Furious" was merely a botched attempt at law enforcement, why was a supervisor of the operation, David Voth, "jovial, if not, not giddy but just delighted about" marked guns showing up at crime scenes in Mexico, as career Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives agent John Dodson told Rep. Darrell Issa's House Oversight Committee?
Why indeed?


  1. ...[W]ho then would come up with such an idiotic plan that put lives at risk for the purpose of tilting a political argument in their favor?

    The same people that think it's a great idea to eliminate 5.5 billion people to arrive at their
    maximum sustainable level of 1.5 billion for a world population. The Obama administration is full of them. And those are just the ones that spoke on the public record.

    It was apparent to me that something was going on in the 2000s, with multiple people like Mexican President Felipe Calderón and his immediate predecessor throwing out the same ludicrous number of 90% (or 70%) of Mexican crime scene gun being of US origin. Democrats here were spouting the same numbers. Now anyone thinking about that for just a few seconds could see the fallacy in that number, given that US weapons can cost at least an order of magnitude more than guns that come into Mexico from Central and South America-- of Eastern European, Chinese, Brazilian origin. And many of them are fully automatic right from the factory. If your going to arm your gang, are you going to use $50/copy "machine guns" or $5000 a copy US or Western European arms? Especially since the latter are so controlled.

    Add to this the talk that has been coming out of the UN about a complete ban on all small arms
    in civilian hands, for all developed nations. They weasel out when pressured for details, but the fact it that has been discussed and mentioned several times. Is it so hard to believe that the man who might aspire to the presidency of The New World Order might want to
    start the ball rolling to bring the US under this mandate?

  2. Those are good observations, Darrell. One of those links points out the same issue with the supposed US supplying Mexican bandits with guns and fueling the violence. Well, it turns out that wasn't the case, not that is until the government of the United States decided to take a hand in the matter and direct it to be done just so, the rubes, and all to trump up some nonsense for gun control laws. The broadness of this kind of thinking appears again and again, whether it be the global push to control the climate (la), the regulation of the banking industry or now gun laws in the US. It's just hard to comprehend it, as it is not a conspiracy, but rather a broad sense of agreement on multiple issues.