The Federal Government Was Selling Weapons to Mexican Drug Cartels?

What a story...

I'm 'outraged':shock2::shock2:

Is the New York Post where the sleaze buckets from The News of the World fetched up after Murdoch closed it down?

I do like the Cloud-Cukooland explanation of the 'anti gun Obama admin' engineering the whole thing to make people hate the American gun industry.All this through the sale of four, count 'em four handguns. Oh, I know, just tip-of-the-iceberg! That is real imagination there. Whatever they are smoking, I want some.
 
In my opinion this is a huge scandal. It appears that federal agents were knowingly and as part of agency policy committing federal felonies. It also appears the DOJ is trying to cover up the extent of this. It also seems like this happening after the Mexican government started complaining about US guns getting into the hands of the drug cartels and demanding the the US increase gun control is just too big of a coincidence. One has to wonder if this wasn't a botched attempt by BATFE to "prove" the Mexican governments allegations so that the US government would have some political cover to do something. The whole thing continues to illustrate how the war on drugs is dangerous to liberty for a whole range of reasons.
 
There were four handguns that were apparently sold directly to the drug cartels by a federal agent. The BATFE facilitated the sale of many more during the "Fast and Furious" operation.
 
Could you please just give it a rest...

please? Gandini has asked for a holiday from this stuff, can't you please just conform for a few days at least?:)
Obama's depredations will still be there next week.:laugh:
 
New or old...

what is the difference? I took it to mean that the whole political bend should be staightened out. I don't think Mark's comments were all that vague-you may have determined what the 'letter' of his comment was from your perspective but this leaves the whole of the 'spirit' of it aside. IMHO
 
I'm kinda thinking the same thing. This scandal is starting to look like it could be the biggest since Watergate. The only reason I think this may not be as big as Watergate is because I doubt Obama knew what was going on. If he did and they can prove it this will be much bigger than Watergate. With Watergate we didn't have any dead federal agents.
 
I'm not seeing anything here...

but a botched 'sting operation'. What else is there in reality? If this had been 'successful' would anyone care. I admit to not knowing what 'success' in this case means. So is this a consequentialist issue or a principle issue? I don't put it beyond the incompetence of his administration to have actual tainted him with knowledge of this fiasco. even Issa is saying it goes back, as an idea and a smaller operation to the Bush years, so maybe it was widely known.


If this isn't a great argument against the 'War on Drugs' and a vindication of Ron Paul's position on that, it is hard to imagine a better.
 
Probably ....

for the same reasons that drone attacks in violation of other country's soveriegnty to kill arbitrarily and extra judicially listed 'terrorists' resulting in who knows how many deaths, isn't a scandal.
BEAUSE AMERICANS DON'T CARE! ISN'T THIS PAINFULLY OBVIOUS?

Where was the outrage when this same agency in the name of god-knows burned out the Branch Davidians in a 'we had to destroy this village to save it' operation. Put a bunch of marginal personalitities in charge of some essentially prohibitive enforcement activity concealed from public view and make them think they are on some holy mission and you get this stuff. The answer isn't to scandalize further something that is already a scandal -the War on Drugs-but to get rid of it altogether.
But this high velocity, small bore, here-today-gone-tomorrow dirt mongering is easier and more fun I guess-every news outlet is having a piece.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top