Skip to comments.Sipsey Street Exclusive: "Meetings, Part 1." Why the ATF scheduled a National Violent Crime
Posted on 08/25/2011 1:42:10 PM PDT by Nachum
"It is essential that our efforts support the strategies and policies of the President and the Attorney General and where possible, complement the strategies of other agencies." -- "Project Gunrunner: A Cartel Focused Strategy," internal ATF report, September 2010, Page 2.
"Things like this happen because of meetings. People sit in meetings and they decide what they want to happen. And then they take decisions, make policy and implement that policy to achieve those ends." He added, "That's why State is so nervous. They signed off on this. In a meeting."
Gunrunner, I pointed out to him, predated the Obama administration. "Yes, but 'walking guns' didn't." I told him it seemed to me that given the dates on the documents that the meetings crafting this policy must have taken place sometime in mid-2009. "And who took power in January, 2009?" he replied.
He continued, summing up this way. The gun issue was known to be radioactive. Every time the Democrats embraced it they got killed at the polls the next election cycle. What was needed, in Rahm Emanuel's parlance, was a good crisis to exploit, something to change the paradigm. The gun confiscationists had always danced in the blood (my term, not his) of every mass shooting and gotten nowhere, to their chagrin and frustration. What was needed was a game changer. Something that fit the meme of "we've got to tighten up on American gunowners, gun stores and gun shows because they are feeding the slaughter."
(Excerpt) Read more at sipseystreetirregulars.blogspot.com ...
A 2009 Obama meeting... well well well
The list, ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
Guess I ought to buy a printer and start sending you some mail Dutch ! Give the FBIs some more work. >PS
Hm, I wonder how much a single letter will cost the government compared to the postage, if they are opening his mail.
Dutch has been a particularly nagging thorn in the government’s paw for several years I know of. I’ve far less reason to doubt, and more to believe,his assertion regards his mail.
Dutch is one of a very small cadre of individuals dragging the nasty details of Operation Fast and Furious into the light of public scrutiny over the past couple of years. >PS
The insightcrime.org, dated 28 February 2011 starts with:
‘Retailers in the U.S. are a major source of weapons for Mexican drug trafficking organizations, but many of their armaments are from military sources.’
An unremarkable article for the most part, with broken links but the bio at the bottom lead to
The investigative reporting workshop, dated February 3, 2011, contains:
...’Others say the problems are also political. Our ATF guys are about as good as you can get, said Goddard, the former attorney general. But I do know that theyve been highly frustrated that their arms are often tied by, I think, a misperception that by diligently enforcing these arms laws that were somehow violating somebodys Second Amendment rights. And I think that causes much of the Justice Department to stay away from this area of prosecution...’
Who in their right mind (no pun intended)could believe this DOJ is concerned about violating the 2nd Amendment? A just in case cya attempt sounds more plausible at this point.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.