Posted by: Frick
- [14082314] Thu, Jun 21, 2012, 08:23 Fast & Furious
I hadn't heard about this until a friend mentioned it to me. I'm curious to see what everyone thinks about it, or if they have other articles that they would recommend for more background.
Only the 50 most recent replies are currently shown. Click on this text to display hidden posts as well.
21
biliruben
ID: 41431323 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 12:37
What's the difference between operation Wide Receiver that started in 2006 and F and F, other than the name? Sounds like the gun-walking tactics were identical.
About 7 minutes in, Darrell Issa puts forth the idea that the program was intended to promote violence in order for the Administration to push through gun control here in the US.
24
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 15:54
Yeah, I'm sure THAT was at the top of the Bush Administrations agenda. Gun Control....well, maybe taking Cheney's shotgun away from him SHOULD have been on the agenda, but...
25
Boldwin
ID: 1555227 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 15:56
bili
The difference I don't think has been fully explored. The difference is in the quality of the tracking and in when interceptions were made.
It isn't clear to me that anyone in highest eschelons in either administration ever followed thru in the sting at the highest levels of the crime families per the logic of the programs, and thus it looks like the real purpose [at the highest levels] was either to help their friends in the drug cartels or develop the rationale for further gun limitations.
26
Boldwin
ID: 1555227 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:01
And I finally found the difference I had heard about which I didn't want to mention without attribution....
Wide Receiver - When a small number of guns (30-40) were lost due to the malfunctioning GPS tracking devices operation Wide Receiver was immediately aborted and cancelled.
Fast and Furious - Operation continued even after ATF and DOJ lost track of all 2,000 guns sold to Mexican drug cartels. - transsylvaniaphoenix.blogspot.com
27
Boldwin
ID: 1555227 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:07
I think that link is so important it needs to be used in full.
hn Derbyshire Friday, June 22, 2012 Differences between Bush's "Wide Receiver" and Obama's "Fast & Furious" explained for stupid liberals: Wide Receiver - The number of guns used in the operation from the beginning until the end of the operation was 300 Fast & Furious - The number of guns used in the operation from the beginning until the end of the operation was 2,000
Wide Receiver - Guns were traced with miniature GPS devices inserted inside the guns Fast & Furious - No tracking devices were used
Wide Receiver - ATF agents were ordered to follow the gun smugglers from the gun store to the US/Mexico border. Fast & Furious - ATF agents were ordered to stand down and not follow the gun smugglers after they left the gun store
Wide Receiver - Mexican army and police was in the loop about Wide Receiver. They took over the surveillance of the gun smugglers after they crossed with the guns in Mexico. Fast & Furious - Mexican authorities were kept in the dark by the ATF and the US DOJ. They had no idea about Fast & Furious and the fact that guns provided to gun smugglers by the American authorities were "walked" in Mexico into the hands of drug cartel murderers.
Wide Receiver - When a small number of guns (30-40) were lost due to the malfunctioning GPS tracking devices operation Wide Receiver was immediately aborted and cancelled Fast and Furious - Operation continued even after ATF and DOJ lost track of all 2,000 guns sold to Mexican drug cartels
Wide Receiver - The operation was planned in such a way the gun smugglers and their cargo were kept under surveillance step by step, from the gun store to the US/Mexico border, across the border into Mexico and to their final destination: the hands of the drug cartel killers. This could have led to arrests made in joint operations by the Mexican authorities and DEA and ATF agents. Fast & Furious - The operation was planned to let the guns go without any surveillance. Guns were supposed to be recovered at the murder scenes. One of the 150+ murder scenes where Fast & Furious guns were recovered was that of US border patrol agent Brian Terry. So far DOJ and ATF didn't came with any explanation about how they were planning to make arrests of the drug cartel murderers BEFORE THEY KILLED PEOPLE with the Fast & Furious guns, and how they were supposed to do those arrest in Mexico without the Mexican authorities knowing anything about this operation.
28
Tree
ID: 05142215 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:18
because, of course, the blog called "Transsylvania Phoenix" is a known expert on this matter.
especially when the heading of the entry refers to "stupid liberals".
perhaps for a moron, that site is the infallible truth. for those with common sense, it's just another blog.
29
Building 7 Leader
ID: 171572711 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:35
You could follow this story on the NBC nightly news where up until this week there has been a total of 8 seconds of coverage. Since the beginning. Total. A year and a half. Or you can learn about it in other ways.
30
Boldwin
ID: 1555227 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:39
You gotta love the theme of the blog:
"Wherever there is a jackboot stomping on a human face there will be a well-heeled Western liberal to explain that the face does, after all, enjoy free health care and 100 percent literacy." John Derbyshire
There are certainly very specific charges made therein, which no one here besides myself had any idea of. Prove them wrong and while you are at it, explain why you think the administration is willing to risk contempt of congress which carries with it the potential of prison time.
31
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 16:45
I am not defending either WR or FF. I think both were poor executions of good intentions. That said,
Wide Receiver - ATF agents were ordered to follow the gun smugglers from the gun store to the US/Mexico border. Fast & Furious - ATF agents were ordered to stand down and not follow the gun smugglers after they left the gun store
There is no practical difference between these two directives. The mules being watched, were never suspect of moving these weapons into the US black market.
Wide Receiver - Mexican army and police was in the loop about Wide Receiver. They took over the surveillance of the gun smugglers after they crossed with the guns in Mexico. Fast & Furious - Mexican authorities were kept in the dark by the ATF and the US DOJ. They had no idea about Fast & Furious and the fact that guns provided to gun smugglers by the American authorities were "walked" in Mexico into the hands of drug cartel murderers.
In all honesty, the difference here is not as great as one would like to expect. The extent to which Mexican LE and Military has been infiltrated and compromised BY the cartels, is fairly well known, and widely recognized. *IS* there a difference between the two procedures? Yes. Yes it a SUBSTANTIAL difference? Practicality, makes me think not.
Wide Receiver - The operation was planned in such a way the gun smugglers and their cargo were kept under surveillance step by step, from the gun store to the US/Mexico border, across the border into Mexico and to their final destination: the hands of the drug cartel killers. This could have led to arrests made in joint operations by the Mexican authorities and DEA and ATF agents.
COULD have, but did not. Hence, no practical difference here either.
If it doesn't include the phrase "Darrel Issa's overreach" then it isn't truthful.
35
Boldwin
ID: 1555227 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 17:35
Now see, I leave you guys alone for a week and you miss all the important details and the phony token conservative starts stroking Obama.
How am I supposed to retire ever?
B7 can't do it alone.
36
Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 18:33
the phony token conservative starts stroking Obama..
Where did you start stroking Obama?
37
Mith
ID: 195122218 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 19:17
Rushbo:
Wide Receiver was a small scale law enforcement gun smuggling interdiction effort that involved Phoenix -- I mistakenly said Tucson yesterday -- involved Phoenix-based ATF agents working in conjunction with Mexican law enforcement. ATF supervisors and justice department prosecutors in Arizona were trying to build a case against a violent group of Mexican drug smugglers. Fast and Furious was an effort to build a case against American gun dealers and the Second Amendment. That's the stark difference.
38
Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Fri, Jun 22, 2012, 19:34
B7 can't do it alone.
I might agree with B7 on many major issues, but he doesn't throw up the FOX meme-of-the-day and defend it to the death despite all evidence.
On this issue, it is clear that the FOXies want the Obama administration to turn over evidence that F&F was simply a smokescreen to take away gun rights. And they won't be satisfied until they get it.
39
Mith
ID: 23217270 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 01:19
Wide Receiver - When a small number of guns (30-40) were lost due to the malfunctioning GPS tracking devices operation Wide Receiver was immediately aborted and cancelled
This is not true according to the wiki link that B and I both posted. It claims that the overwhelming majority of the 450 guns were lost once they went over the border. And it also says the operation was not aborted until 2009 - by President Obama.
41
Boldwin
ID: 34555233 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 04:58
C'mon, MITH. Obama's plan didn't even try to track them. They even insisted agents refrain from tracking them. Taking a microscope to how well Wide Receiver did at tracking is silly at best, deceptive and misleading at worst.
Wiki states:
2 Operations
2.1 2006-2007: Operation Wide Receiver and other probes 2.2 2009-2011: Operation Fast and Furious
In one place and:
Indictments began in 2010, over three years after Wide Receiver concluded.
How do you get "the operation was not aborted until 2009 - by President Obama. out of that? I control-F'ed every instance of the term 2009 in that wiki entry and in not one does it suggest Wide Receiver was still active in 2009 and that Obama terminated the program.
But you keep leaning on that wishful thinking.
42
Mith
ID: 23217270 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 09:47
wishful thinking
Please. This was the paragraph I misread:
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 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, nine people had been charged with making false statements in acquisition of firearms and illicit transfer, shipment or delivery of firearms.[18] 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.
You were also way off claiming only a dozen guns were lost - which is what a smaller Bush-era probe found.. Almost all of the 450 guns sold in OWS were lost.
According to Wiki, OFF was a much more ambitious plan, attempting to take down large operations rather than the small fish that it says OWS went after.
Don't think that means I'm excusing it. There's only one person in this thread attempting a case that either of those operations wasn't so bad.
43
Boldwin
ID: 30553239 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 11:01
There's only one person in this thread attempting a case that either of those operations wasn't so bad.
I spose in your world accusing the Bush family of being in a drug dealing dynasty going back before the Boxer Rebellion, of placing their two sons as governor of two states at the heart of the drug smuggling into this country, and then of their 2nd president setting up DEA agents and sending them to prison as warnings to other DEA agents not to do their job, and then running a leaky program that armed a drug cartel civil war in Mexico...
...constitutes a defense of the Bush family.
I love the way liberals think. I could watch them perform for hours.
44
Mith
ID: 23217270 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 11:13
I don't think you care about defending President Bush. I think you are compelled to defend selective outrage charges against the right and that blaming Obama is your instinctive go-to option play.
I'm pretty sure it's mostly instinct as opposed to anything related to tempered reason because the last time F&F came up here you went out of your way to say Obama had no part of it and claimed the masons were responsible. :/
45
Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 11:24
Holder is a Mason?
46
Boldwin
ID: 30553239 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 11:35
I don't think you care about defending President Bush.
See how much progress we've made?
47
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 11:45
re 45 ... shhhhhh
48
Boldwin
ID: 40502313 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 19:46
Did you know Sarge isn't?
Me neither.
49
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Sat, Jun 23, 2012, 20:08
lol knew that would get ya.
50
Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Sun, Jun 24, 2012, 11:41
In #29, B7 laments that because NBC news has failed to cover this story, one must learn about it in other ways.
It appears that the main other way turns out to that bastion of the liberal MSM, CBS News.
Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation "Fast and Furious" to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.
This CBS investigation is the link used by FOX to claim Holder's DOJ Used 'Fast and Furious' to Justify New 2nd Amendment Crackdown.
Except the CBS investigation doesn't mention the 2nd amendment. Fox, and every other outlet(Rush Limbaugh) who are using the CBS investigation as a basis for claims of an attack on the 2nd amendment, are using that emotional headline for effect, rather than in the interest of accuracy.
Now, if the debate centers on what constitutes an assault on the 2nd amndment, so be it. The CBS investigation reveals that the ATF hoped to use the sting to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". 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.
Obviously, those who want no gun regulation or control of any kind are going to point to a demand for tracing information as an assault on the 2nd amendment, even though tracing information doesn't restrict a person's right tp bear arms, any more that requiring a person to register their car restricts that person's right to own a car.
As to the wisdom of the "Fast and Furious" operation and the execution, or lack thereof, it appears to have been a very poorly structured operation with lousy oversight and questionable directives and motives. Calls for Holder's resignation seem legitimate. Claims that F&F was an attempt to subvert the 2nd amendment are not legitimate.
51
Boldwin
ID: 37582323 Sun, Jun 24, 2012, 18:02
Ah, so we can safely ignore a left-wing agenda item that's been there my entire lifetime. Good to know. I feel much better now. Thank goodness I have you here to reassure me.
52
Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Sun, Jun 24, 2012, 21:34
Not just us. Reality.
53
Tree
ID: 17039238 Mon, Jun 25, 2012, 01:37
Not just us. Reality.
you might need to provide him with the definition of that last word.
Still, he's letting the contempt vote proceed, despite believing that Holder didn't know anything about the guns walking:
56
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 01:00
Soledad Obrien piece on CNN tonight, re a writer from Fortune I think it was....says 5 BATF Agents say there was NO "gun walking", but rather AZ laws are so soft, they had no authority TO arrest the buyers. That they wanted to, that they asked to, and that prosecutors told them no. But the weapons were not purchased with Govt funds.
Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 09:10
Just listen to yourselves
What does that mean? You think 18 year old kids with no visible means of support walk into a gun store and buy 100 rifles, then go into the parking lot and resell them to Jose and Pablo is tough gun control?
The NRA is an evil organization that cares nothing about the health and safety of American citizens.
60
Frick
ID: 14082314 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 09:30
The NRA also looks at smoking bans that took gradual steps until smoking is illegal in almost every location in some states. They aren't willing to concede anything for fear that the first step that it will lead to many more.
I think they are wrong, but I can see their position.
61
Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 11:46
Their position is extreme, and costs the lives of people. There is no doubt that the terror in Mexico is kept up as a direct result of lax American gun laws.
62
boikin
ID: 532592112 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 12:56
so your position is that our gun laws have to be more restrictive because Mexico can not govern its own country?
63
Perm Dude
ID: 3210201915 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 12:58
Nope. I didn't say anything about that. I believe our own lax gun laws contribute to gang violence in Mexico and I believe that is self-evident. I haven't offered any solution or suggested any change to our own laws.
64
Frick
ID: 14082314 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 13:00
I agree that the position is extreme and as I said, I think it is wrong.
But, do you agree that there is some validity to my point that they are afraid that agreeing to the first step of gun control will lead to more and more gun control laws, similar to the banning of smoking?
65
Frick
ID: 14082314 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 13:01
Thank you for the link in 54. That's what I was looking for when I originally started the thread.
66
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 13:05
heh, no wonder that piece seemed familiar. lol PD had already linked it. Thought I'd seen it somewhere. :/
67
Boldwin
ID: 225162520 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 13:12
OK, just to sum up...
The CBS investigation reveals that the ATF hoped to use the sting to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3". - PV#50
There is no doubt that the terror in Mexico is kept up as a direct result of lax American gun laws. - PD
...
...but only a FOX News viewer would believe liberals who see excuses to gun-grab everywhere, planned F&F for the sole purpose of gun-grabbing and vilifying the state of existing gun laws and gun dealers.
68
Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 14:38
Just to sum up
The state of existing gun laws in Arizona need to be villified because many of the gun dealers in the state are not gun dealers in a legitimate sense.
Of course Boldwin doesn't respond to the fact that a kid can buy 100 rifles then turn around in the parking lot and give them to the cartels. That would take cognizant examination of the reality, which is foreign to the perpetually tunnel-visioned.
69
Boldwin
ID: 225162520 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 18:47
Well actually the gun dealers in those F&F straw purchases called the BATF and were told to go ahead with the deals anyway.
70
Pancho Villa
ID: 597172916 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 20:52
Well, actually the BATF couldn't arrest anybody because no law had been broken according to NRA-owned federal prosecutors in Arizona.
By January 2010 the agents had identified 20 suspects who had paid some $350,000 in cash for more than 650 guns. According to Rep. Issa's congressional committee, Group VII had enough evidence to make arrests and close the case then.
In a meeting on Jan. 5, 2010, Emory Hurley, the assistant U.S. Attorney in Phoenix overseeing the Fast and Furious case, told the agents they lacked probable cause for arrests, according to ATF records. Hurley's judgment reflected accepted policy at the U.S. Attorney's Office in Arizona. "[P]urchasing multiple long guns in Arizona is lawful," Patrick Cunningham, the U.S. Attorney's then–criminal chief in Arizona would later write. "Transferring them to another is lawful and even sale or barter of the guns to another is lawful unless the United States can prove by clear and convincing evidence that the firearm is intended to be used to commit a crime."
It was nearly impossible in Arizona to bring a case against a straw purchaser. The federal prosecutors there did not consider the purchase of a huge volume of guns, or their handoff to a third party, sufficient evidence to seize them. A buyer who certified that the guns were for himself, then handed them off minutes later, hadn't necessarily lied and was free to change his mind. Even if a suspect bought 10 guns that were recovered days later at a Mexican crime scene, this didn't mean the initial purchase had been illegal. To these prosecutors, the pattern proved little. Instead, agents needed to link specific evidence of intent to commit a crime to each gun they wanted to seize.
Can anyone think of a reason why the ATF hoped to use the sting to justify a new gun regulation called "Demand Letter 3"?
Well, anyone besides rabid NRA supporters and those who consider the SEIU the "enemy," but want the most brutal criminals in the Western Hemisphere unfettered access to whatever arsenal they can drive away with, paid for by Americans' insatiable appetite for pot, coke, meth and heroin.
71
sarge33rd
ID: 12554167 Thu, Jun 28, 2012, 21:04
Rep Micah, hammered last night by Soledad and again this afternoon bu John King; is ignoring that the guns were not bought with taxpayer money (as he keeps insisting), that the guns were not "walked" BY the ATF but indeed transferred legally, and continues with his purely partisan and highly transparent effort, to "hold accountable all involved". (IOW, hang some Democrats)
This House, with its Tea Party "waaaah, me first and only" majority, is a national embarrassment.
If you believe a recent post violates the policy on Civility and Respect, you may report the abuse via email to moderators@rotoguru1.com