Below is an update from Fox News regarding the growing scandal over ATF's Fast and Furious operation.
http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2011/07/06/justice-department-obstructing-fast-and-furious-gun-probe-atf-director-says/
Whatever you may have initially concluded about this story, it is serious business. We have a diplomatic incident on our hands over an operation that allowed illegally purchased guns to find their way into the hands of Mexican drug cartels. At least one of the guns was involved in the killing of US Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.
Ken Melson, the acting director of ATF, is telling congressional investigators that higher-ups at DOJ are covering up the true story. This in itself is unprecedented. It is alo alleged that the target of the ATF case was an FBI informant, which ATF allegedly did not know.
There may be a plausible explanation for all this, but it cannot be allowed to blow over. The allegations are much too serious. This involves four federal agencies, the DOJ as well as Mexico. Until the truth is uncovered, the story should not be allowed to die.
Next step? Congress has to get involved as well as the Office of Professional Responsibility or whatever they call themselves these days (within DOJ). That means everyone involved has to be put under oath, and ATF whistle blowers must be given protection. (At least one has already been terminated for speaking out.)
The very integrity of our executive branch is now in question. (As if it wasn't already.)
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
Let us hope that any "Independent Investigator" starts with the testimony of Sarah Brady. Remember, Obama talked to Sarah in March, to tell her that he was working on stricter gun control plan, but is was "stealthy" and he could not tell her more about the plan.
Hmmm, I wonder if Rep. D. Issa reads this blog?
Squid
Liberals take it as an article of faith that guns kill people. They do whatever they can, including this bollixed up fiasco, to convince the public of this. The fact of the matter is that PEOPLE kill people. They may use guns, knives, hatchets, duct tape, or whatever is at hand.
The public is SAFER in areas where there are no gun restrictions. It turns out that the massacres in schools, shopping malls, etc. all occurred in gun restricted areas. In most cases, the rampages continued until some citizen or police officer with a gun put an end to it.
It is another perfect example of the liberals "Stage One" thinking... outlaw guns and gun related crime will decrease. They never, ever, think of what comes next. Unintended consequences is a foreign concept.
The unintended consequences of course are that kooks and criminals will still obtain them and the public will be defenseless.
.
.
This looks like a massive intel operation to swing public opinion against guns.
One of the many things I despise about liberals is that they seem intent on letting the so-called "conservatives" have all the guns.
Why is it "so called"? Aren't they conservative enough?
Why is "conservatives" in quotes? You think some unnamed people are just posing as conservatives?
I'm pretty sure I'm going to regret this.
Makes no sense to me, Miggie.
"Conservative" is in quotes because there is NOTHING conservative about them. Maybe that includes you, but I really don't know enough about you to say for sure.
My mother is a life-long Republican, and a self-defined conservative. She has been embarrassed for many years to see Republican administrations running up huge deficits, increasing the national debt. She has come to believe that those who now dominate the Republican party are not interested in balancing the budget, per se, but are interested in running the country into debt FOR THE PURPOSE of cancelling out all kinds of government functions they object to on principle.
I think she's right.
Further, I know enough history to remember that conservative traditionally meant respect for authority and tradition, while liberal meant support for an unrestricted free market and the specific kind of "progress" it could produce. When the terms "liberal" and "conservative" have degenerated into a hazy notion of "left" and "right" -- divorced from any clear sense of liberty vs. authority, working class vs. capital, internationalism vs. isolationism, agrarian vs. industrial, the terms have lost all meaning. They are just convenient labels for rival gangs, like the "green" and the "blue" in medieval Constantinople.
Check out FrontPorchRepublic sometime, and you'll see a ferment of real thought over libertarian and conservative issues that are at least worthy of consideration. The Republicans are opportunistically populist when it helps them manipulate the electorate, but they have more in common with the National Inquirer than with the legacy of, e.g., Benjamin Disraeli, or even Thomas Dewey. They have nothing to do with the legacy of Abraham Lincoln.
Post a Comment