Fast and Furious

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stavros

I don't have access to the daily news feeds from various sources you have there, which gives you as an American a greater opportunity to weigh up the arguments within the USA, but I think if you look at this whole issue in structural terms, the intensification of the conflict in Mexico pre-dated the Obama administration, and the key links -the links that matter most- that the cartels have to the USA are through the supply chains for the customers that buy the dope the cartels have to sell. How does anyone on the streets of San Francisco or New York get their coke for the weekend party? Is it on sale in the drug store?

From that perspective, the Obama administration looks more like a sideshow than major players -unfortunately in Mexico's case even the sideshow is responsible for too many grisly deaths. But the stats and evidence also prove that weapons are being purchased in Texas by US passport holders on behalf of the cartels, and you can't deny that. yes, some shop owners are tipping off the police about suspicious purchasers, but it is happening, and your laws enable it to happen, and Obama, Holder and Congress seem incapable of limiting access to a whole range of weapons of mass destruction, which is what these things become over time. The bitter irony must be that a law designed to provide citizens with protection from a foreign enemy, is empowering cartels who are, in my distant estimation, enemies of democracy in America North, Central and South.

What are you doing about it?

It looks to me like nobody is emerging from this mess with any claim to the moral high ground -whatever Holder was doing doesn't seem to have worked; the same is true of Calderon.

My primary focus is on the root causes, which are supply and demand for marijuana and cocaine; the two principal products at issue. That guns are in the mix is reminiscent of the Reagan administration's involvement in the illegal narcotics and arms trades in Central America and the Middle East - a notorious figure called Oliver North comes to mind, and to compare and conflate, is he worse or better than Mr Holder?

---

Well we don't know yet. This investagation is far from over. Let's deflect to something that occured back in the 80's...shall we???....that should buy you enough time to piece together a little bit better defense of Holder/Obama

As I've told Trish ( who attempted the same bait and switch argument) while I don't condone the illegalties of Iran Contra, ( there were multiple convictions) at least the mission was understandable...to free American hostages where all other attempts had failed. And you may recall.......Reagan ultimately went before the American people and took full responsibility. How refreshing compared to the blame game crowd we currently are burdened with. I also don't overlook the evidence that the Contra's were involved in trafficing. But that's a good history lesson for another day. How about your libs deal with the here and now for a change?

Fast and Furious
Project Gunrunner
Wide Receiver
Iran Contra

Four fucking sides of the same crazy trapezoid.

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_35kDzNt-gT...24_515214.jpeg

1. Fast and Furious is a despicable gun running program run by Obama's justice department. No facts being ignored there. But what is it that [you] are ignoring? Not even acknowledging? The existence of the precedents for Fast and Furious, namely Iran-Contra, Project Gunrunner and Wide Receiver. Gee why would you want to ignore the facts?
2. So since you don't think we should ignore the facts let's mention the precedents. Iran-Contra, Project Gunrunner and Wide Receiver. Oops! Am I blaming Bush? Can I help it if Bush is the source of so many of our more idiotic policies? No and no. I'm just recognizing the facts.
3. Oh, and this is weird. You just played the race card. WTF???

BTW, cartoons do the level of your thought a certain justice.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Faldur

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_35kDzNt-gT...24_515214.jpeg

---

Pulling one from my playbook :cheers:

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by fred41

Don't want to put words in his mouth..but I believe he is speaking about legalization.

---

Point taken, sometimes subtle comments pass unnoticed in this section of the board.

Onmyknees -realpolitik leads governments to do all sorts of things which they try to hide from the public, which bend or break domestic and international law -but it is noticeable that instead of discussing the key issue of illegal drug use, its manufacture and supply, and the criminal activities associated with it, your primary aim is to undermine the Obama administration. I am not suggesting it be exempt from criticism, but there are larger issues, and I don't know what the Republican contenders for the White House next year have to offer to deal with this problem, but that could just be lack of awareness on my part.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by onmyknees

You're a whining, sniveling, knee jerk liberal. You're a hopeless excuse for a independently thinking, informed individual. Note that your first comment on this thread, or the matter in general is to blindly run to the defense of Obama, and blame me. It shows a lack of intellectual honesty and curiosity. You state no facts to the contrary, no evidence to defend the program or Holder's Department, or for that matter even Holder. You bring nothing to the table but blind loyalty . Not once did I, Senator Grassley, Rep Issa, Ms. Atkinson, or anyone else suggest Obama's involvement. The evidence is clear, the facts sworn, the body count verified.....and strangely....it's all my fault. Don't you see what you've become ? This is precisely why I label you a sycophant. You can't even allow your self the possibility that this occurred as the facts showed. Or that the August letter to Congress stood for 6 months as public record until it was withdrawn because of what Holder termed "inconsistencies and inaccuracies". You will follow your Dear Leader anywhere he takes you.

And yes....It's a fact. Ms. Atkinson is the only Lame Stream Media person who has had the balls to ask questions. The NYT, WAPO, CNN, ABC, NBC, etc, etc seem to be more enamored with Newt's first wife then they are with 200 dead Mexicans, a dead Border Patrol Agent, and an attorney General who's had to come before Congress 3 times, and leaves more questions unanswered, then answered.

---

Awww look who got butthurt. I guess I hit a little too close to home. lol. If you can't handle the heat of the politics section you better move on. But let's be real, as the whole board is well aware, you're a pinhead, a clown and worst of all a liar. Exhibit A: I "ran to the defense of Obama". Nope, never happened, you made it up. I won't defend this program because I think it's terrible. My point is that you don't give a fuck about the program, you just want to bash the prez. You're so concerned about 200 dead Mexican citizens? Where's your thread about the hundred thousand dead Iraqis? Your approach to politics is based entirely on which team it helps or hurts. You don't understand or even attempt to understand the issues, just repeat the talking points that FNC shovels your way. You breathlessly report back here every little bit of partisan ammunition you pick up in your echo chamber like a toddler picking up trash in a playground to show her mommy. You play at politics, aping the speech and sound of people with actual thoughts, but with you, there's no there there.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BluegrassCat

Awww look who got butthurt. I guess I hit a little too close to home. lol. If you can't handle the heat of the politics section you better move on. But let's be real, as the whole board is well aware, you're a pinhead, a clown and worst of all a liar. Exhibit A: I "ran to the defense of Obama". Nope, never happened, you made it up. I won't defend this program because I think it's terrible. My point is that you don't give a fuck about the program, you just want to bash the prez. You're so concerned about 200 dead Mexican citizens? Where's your thread about the hundred thousand dead Iraqis? Your approach to politics is based entirely on which team it helps or hurts. You don't understand or even attempt to understand the issues, just repeat the talking points that FNC shovels your way. You breathlessly report back here every little bit of partisan ammunition you pick up in your echo chamber like a toddler picking up trash in a playground to show her mommy. You play at politics, aping the speech and sound of people with actual thoughts, but with you, there's no there there.

---

You're despicable. You "think the program is terrible" , but immediately pull the liberal bait and switch. It's a throw away line to you. You could have/should have ended your post there, and in that way perhaps not be seen as the dupe you are. But you couldn't resist the inclinations of your dogma....change the subject, conflate, compare, blame on others, try to justify this incident with other dissimilar incidents.. First off.....what the fuck does a UN approved, US, Congressional approved , Coalition approved military action in Iraq have to do with Mexican drug dealers shooting civilians with guns obtained with the blessing of the ATF?
Yes there were civilians killed in Iraq. There were civilians killed in London in 1941-45, and in Germany, and in every country in Europe, so for you to use that as some justification for what you perceive as my indifference to Mexican deaths is deplorable, but that's what you liberals do. Yes..this is about the Obama Administration, it's about incompetence, and the overwhelming political urge to sway public opinion about second amendment rights. It's about how they've handled the aftermath.

Is your inference that US troops and or the US Government had a hand in 100,000 deaths? And where are you getting this 100,000 figure. Media Matters ? Go back and do your homework and breakdown that 100,000 figure before I think of you as a bigger fool than you've displayed to date. Then tell me how many US soldiers were killed or wounded because of the historically stringent rules of engagement they were under in Iraq in an attempt to protect civilians. Tell me about this 100,000 figure....do you recall Haditha? A total of 15 ( fifteen) Iraqis were killed by US Marines, and it was news for months. Set aside who you believe, that according to Time magazine was the worst US incident involving civilians of the war. That was 15 people, and your number is 100,000. How many of that 100,000 were killed by suicide bombers?...how many killed by insurgents? Surely if 100,000 were killed there must be multiple incidents of multiple deaths at the hands of US bombs...where are they? Show me.

Now...can we get back to Fast and Furious, or should we discuss the civilian deaths in Dresden in 1944 or the siege at Stalingrad ?? Can you see how absurd you are? I can understand defending your guy, but to use Iraqi deaths in doing so says a lot about who you are.

Fast and Furious is another plate of steaming shit that the ATF has come up with. Hopefully all firearms related crimes will be switched back to the FBI and the ATF can just deal with permits like SBRS. Now as far as gun control goes these buyers could never have gotten the guns if the ATF had not told the FFLs to sell the weapons anyways. What I don't get is why the cartels were interested in the weapons in the first place, lets face it in Mexico the cartels can get AK 47s that are select fire and cost 100 or so dollars, AKMS bought from us stores are going to cost around 500 and be semiautomatic. And if you look at the states with less gun control they have fewer crimes. Remember if someone has the right to live than they have the right to self defense. If they have the right to self defense than they have the right to the most effective means of self defense. If you take away the means you take away the right.