Wednesday, October 5, 2011

Fast and Furious

Not only of my top movie franchises (In specific, non-random order 1. Die Hard 2. Indiana Jones 3. Star Wars IV-VI 4. Fast and Furious 5. Back to the Future 6. Mighty Ducks I-II) but my current favorite government scandal that gets no coverage.

Here is a more comprehensive synopsis than I am going to provide, read the whole thing

Basically the idea of the program was to allow gun sales to suspected or known cartel members and track them up the chain to find bigger fish. Over 2000 guns were involved, with some sold personally by ATF agents whose complaints and objections were ignored by their superiors. The death toll includes at least one Border Control agent and according to Mexican authorities literally hundreds more people.

Let that sink in, the administration, in a program sponsored by the Obama-Pelosi-Reid Stimulus, knowingly put guns in the hands of cartel killers. This lead to deaths on both sides of the border. This is something that bothers me 100x more than Troy Davis being executed but it barely registers on the national news radar.

What was the objective? Why are we violating the sovereignty of a neighbor and putting our officers and civilians at risk? What is the end game that merits this strategy? What benefit do we derive from this?

Since the observation and surveillance techniques successfully followed zero guns and lead to zero high ranking cartel arrests, we are left with the following options.

1. Complete incompetence
2. A different motive

Even someone with as little faith in the governments ability to do anything efficiently and well as I do would have a hard time believing that 2000 guns would be knowingly given to cartel warriors accidentally. So what would the other motive be? As I see it there are two options

1. Playing realpolitik between the Cartels
2. Influencing the debate on gun control in the states

If this was an operation designed to arm the Sinaloa Cartel against the Zetas who are becoming the most powerful institution in Mexico, legitimate or otherwise, it is still a disaster. Even if they were trying to counterbalance the Zetas why use American retail gun dealers? Why not buy guns internationally or use the thousands of guns taken from the field in Afghanistan or Iraq? At the very least, the sourcing the guns from the  American stores when it would be cleaner and more covert to do it from elsewhere seems to be done with an eye on tilting the debate on the second amendment here.

Now Holder is being investigated for perjury for his supposed ignorance of the program in Congressional testimonies earlier this year. Could not happen to a nicer guy.

Reagan was almost impeached for Iran Contra, documents coming forward are indicating more Administration knowledge than previously indicated. This is worse. I am beside myself that this does not get more coverage.

1 comment:

  1. Reagan was almost impeached for Iran Contra, documents coming forward are indicating more Administration knowledge than previously indicated. This is worse.

    Richard, you are a sharp, educated, well-read and worldly individual, but that statement is pure horse manure. You are off by multiple decimal places on both scale and scope when trying to compare these two situations. Scale: Two thousand guns is two thousand guns, and thus nothing to sneeze at, but Iran-Contra involved the secret sale of thousands of anti-aircraft and anti-tank missiles to a country that was the subject of a strict arms embargo. And anyway, do you really think that the cartels would have had any trouble getting their hands on 2,000 handguns via some other means? Really?? There are (estimated to be) more than 400 guns sold every single minute in the U.S. If they hadn't gotten the guns from undercover agents they would have gotten them some other way without any problem. Scope: There is absolutely ZERO evidence to suggest that Obama (who you attempted to shoehorn into the discussion) is involved in any of this. TBD on what Holder knew and when he knew it, though I wouldn't hold my breath on finding out any serious answers on that (cause Democrats are [the only ones] so adept at stone-walling against accusations of cover ups). Obviously the ATF and other groups who directly oversaw this operation need to provide answers because it does appear to be a case of gross negligence, incompetence, or both. But let's not outkick our coverage as far as portraying this as the type of scandal that has the potential to bring down a president (the way that Iran-Contra absolutely should have had your boy Ronny come clean).