Archive for October, 2012

Police Chief Resigns in Scandal-Plagued Cherryville, NC

October 30, 2012

From The Charlotte Observer By Joe DePriest, October 30, 2012

Cherryville Police Chief Woody Burgess, who was suspended with pay following a recent scandal in the police department, is resigning, a city official said Tuesday.

According to Acting City Manager Jeff Cash, Burgess will step down effective Wednesday.

Burgess and Capt. Mike Allred were suspended following an FBI probe that resulted in the arrest on Oct. 17 of six people, including three Cherryville police officers. They were charged in an alleged theft “protection” scheme.

Cash said on Tuesday that Burgess had been chief for 10 years and was paid $62,920 annually.

In July, Burgess had given notice to the city that he would retire on Dec. 1, Cash said. But several weeks later, Burgess withdrew the notice and went on family medical leave to care for his wife, Cash said.

“Now, he’s resigned at his choosing and will retire,” Cash said.

Following the suspension of Burgess, Sgt. Cam Jenks was named Acting Police Chief.

NYPD Officer Held in Plot to Kidnap, Cook, Eat Women

October 25, 2012

From The New York Times by Joseph Goldstein, October 25, 2012

A New York police officer was arrested Wednesday in Queens by the Federal Bureau of Investigation after he discussed cooking and eating female body parts, according to a criminal complaint.

The evidence against the officer, a six-year veteran of the New York Police Department, consists of e-mails and instant messages in which he was “discussing plans to kidnap, rape, torture, kill, cook and eat body parts of a number of women,” according to the complaint against the officer, Gilberto Valle.

The complaint suggests that Officer Valle, who worked in the 26th Precinct in Manhattan and lives in Forest Hills, Queens, never followed through on any of the acts he is accused of discussing. He was charged with federal kidnapping conspiracy, and is expected to appear in Federal District Court in Manhattan on Thursday afternoon. Officer Valle, who is married, joined the force in July 2006.

In one message to a co-conspirator, Officer Valle wrote that he was contemplating cooking a person “over a low heat, keep her alive as long as possible,” according to the complaint.

“The allegations in the complaint really need no description from us,” Mary E. Galligan, the F.B.I.’s acting assistant director, said in a statement. “They speak for themselves. It would be an understatement merely to say Valle’s own words and actions were shocking.”

The criminal complaint describes two separate episodes in which Officer Valle discussed abducting women. In each case it appears that the women knew the officer vaguely.

In an episode in February, Officer Valle sent an online message to another unnamed person in which he offered to kidnap a woman on the person’s behalf for a price: “$5,000 and she is all yours,” the officer wrote, according to the complaint.

“Just so that you know, she may be knocked out when I get her to you,” Officer Valle wrote, according to the criminal complaint. “I don’t know how long the solvent I am using will last but I have to knock her out to get her out of her apartment safely.”

Officer Valle appeared to be under the impression that the person he was communicating with intended to rape the woman, according to the criminal complaint.

“She will be alive,” he wrote. “It’s a short drive to you. I think I would rather not get involved in the rape. You paid for her. She is all yours and I don’t want to be tempted the next time I abduct a girl.”

Officer Valle also wrote that he would not budge on his $5,000 price. “Like I said this is very risky and will ruin my life if I am caught.”

While the complaint does not identify the woman in question, F.B.I. agents later learned that cellphone tracking devices indicated that Officer Valle had made or received phone calls on the block in Manhattan where the woman lived. When an F.B.I. agent interviewed the woman, she said she did not know Officer Valle well.

In a search of the officer’s computer, federal investigators discovered “files pertaining to at least 100 women,” according to the complaint. “The F.B.I. has identified and interviewed 10 of these women, each of whom has confirmed to the F.B.I. that Valle is known to her.”

In the search, federal agents also discovered a document Officer Valle had created that appeared to be a “blueprint” for “abducting and cooking” another woman, according to the complaint, which redacts the name of the victim.

In one message from July 19, 2012, Officer Valle sent an instant message to a person described as a “co-conspirator,” indicating that he was meeting with the intended victim three days later, according to the complaint. The victim, who was later interviewed in October by the F.B.I., said she had met the officer that day “at a restaurant for lunch,” according to the complaint. What happened during or after the lunch was not disclosed.

To view the criminal complaint filed against Valle, copy and paste the link below into your web-browser:

http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2012/10/25/nyregion/Valle-Gilberto-Criminal-Complaint.html?ref=nyregion

Obama Lied Through His Teeth for Weeks About Libya Embassy Bombing

October 24, 2012

White House Told of Militant Claim Two Hours After Libya Attack: Emails

From Reuters News Service by Mark Hosenball, October 23, 2012

Officials at the White House and State Department were advised two hours after  attackers assaulted the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, on September  11 that an Islamic militant group had claimed credit for the attack, official emails show.

The emails, obtained by Reuters from government sources not connected with U.S. spy agencies or the State Department and who requested anonymity, specifically mention that the Libyan group called Ansar al-Sharia had asserted responsibility for the attacks.

The brief emails also show how U.S. diplomats described the attack, even as it was still under way, to Washington.

U.S. Ambassador Christopher Stevens and three other Americans were killed in the Benghazi assault, which President Barack Obama and other U.S. officials ultimately acknowledged was a “terrorist” attack carried out by militants with suspected links to al Qaeda affiliates or sympathizers.

Administration spokesmen, including White House spokesman Jay Carney, citing an unclassified assessment prepared by the CIA, maintained for days that the attacks likely were a spontaneous protest against an anti-Muslim film.

While officials did mention the possible involvement of “extremists,” they did not lay blame on any specific militant groups or possible links to al Qaeda or its affiliates until intelligence officials publicly alleged that on September 28.

There were indications that extremists with possible al Qaeda connections were involved, but also evidence that the attacks could have erupted spontaneously, they said, adding that government experts wanted to be cautious about pointing fingers prematurely.

U.S. intelligence officials have emphasized since shortly after the attack that early intelligence reporting about the attack was mixed.

Spokesmen for the White House and State Department had no immediate response to requests for comments on the emails.

MISSIVES FROM LIBYA

The records obtained by Reuters consist of three emails dispatched by the State Department’s Operations Center to multiple government offices, including addresses at the White House, Pentagon, intelligence community and FBI, on the afternoon of September 11.

The first email, timed at 4:05 p.m. Washington time – or 10:05 p.m. Benghazi time, 20-30 minutes after the attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission allegedly began – carried the subject line “U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi Under Attack” and the notation “SBU”, meaning “Sensitive But Unclassified.”

The text said the State Department’s regional security office had reported that the diplomatic mission in Benghazi was “under attack. Embassy in Tripoli reports approximately 20 armed people fired shots; explosions have been heard as well.”

The message continued: “Ambassador Stevens, who is currently in Benghazi, and four … personnel are in the compound safe haven. The 17th of February militia is providing security support.”

A second email, headed “Update 1: U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi” and timed 4:54 p.m. Washington time, said that the Embassy in Tripoli had reported that “the firing at the U.S. Diplomatic Mission in Benghazi had stopped and the compound had been cleared.” It said a “response team” was at the site attempting to locate missing personnel.

A third email, also marked SBU and sent at 6:07 p.m. Washington time, carried the subject line: “Update 2: Ansar al-Sharia Claims Responsibility for Benghazi Attack.”

The message reported: “Embassy Tripoli reports the group claimed responsibility on Facebook and Twitter and has called for an attack on Embassy Tripoli.”

While some information identifying recipients of this message was redacted from copies of the messages obtained by Reuters, a government source said that one of the addresses to which the message was sent was the White House Situation Room, the president’s secure command post.

Other addressees included intelligence and military units as well as one used by the FBI command center, the source said.

It was not known what other messages were received by agencies in Washington from Libya that day about who might have been behind the attacks.

Intelligence experts caution that initial reports from the scene of any attack or disaster are often inaccurate.

By the morning of September 12, the day after the Benghazi attack, Reuters reported that there were indications that members of both Ansar al-Sharia, a militia based in the Benghazi area, and al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb, the North African affiliate of al Qaeda’s faltering central command, may have been involved in organizing the attacks.

One U.S. intelligence official said that during the first classified briefing about Benghazi given to members of Congress, officials “carefully laid out the full range of sparsely available information, relying on the best analysis available at the time.”

The official added, however, that the initial analysis of the attack that was presented to legislators was mixed.

“Briefers said extremists were involved in attacks that appeared spontaneous, there may have been a variety of motivating factors, and possible links to groups such as (al Qaeda in the Islamic Maghreb and Ansar al-Sharia) were being looked at closely,” the official said.

(Additional reporting by Susan Cornwell; Editing by Mary Milliken and Jim Loney)

Cherryville, NC Neighbors Speak Out After Police Corruption Charges

October 19, 2012

From www.wcnc.com, October 19, 2012, By Tony Burbeck

CHERRYVILLE, N.C. — Neighbors say Cherryville needs to scrap its police department and start over from scratch now that officers are accused of escorting criminals through town with stolen goods in exchange for cash.

Cherryville officers Frankie Dellinger, Casey Crawford and David Mauney were arrested in a federal raid Wednesday, as well as Gaston County Reserve Deputy Wesley Golden.

Prosecutors allege the men provided protection for people moving stolen property, took bribes and extorted more than $750,000.

Neighbors say the arrests broke their trust and people who are supposed to protect and serve made their town less safe.

Reports say the Gaston County District Attorney plans to drop charges in pending cases that rely upon the testimony of the arrested officers.
“They can’t go put their hand on the Bible and swear to anything now. What can they do? Every thief, every person that’s been caught in this town, how are you going to believe them now,” said neighbor Johnny Johnson.  “Start over, clean house.”

“Greed gets to everybody, I guess,” said neighbor Dick Blackwelder. “I feel for their families.”

George Absher doesn’t.  He says he is Frankie Dellinger’s cousin by marriage and does not support him after the arrest because he says alleged crooked cops sent a message to criminals: “You can get away with it,” Absher said.

Two of the accused officers are due in federal court Friday morning

Judge Grants Bond to 2 of 6 Accused in Cherryville, NC Scandal

October 19, 2012

From www.wcnc.com, October 19, 2012

Cherryville, NC – Six men, including four local law enforcement officers had their arraignment hearings Friday morning.

The six men are accused of helping transport thousands of dollars in stolen goods and cash across Gaston County.  Three of the men work with the Cherryville Police Department while one is a sheriff’s deputy with the Gaston County Sheriff’s Office.

A federal judge gave $50,000 bonds to Trey Mauney and John Hendricks. The other four men in custody were held without bond.

Family members refused to talk to NBC Charlotte after Friday’s hearing.

FBI investigators arrived in Cherryville Wednesday to collect evidence and make the arrests.

The accusations are split among two different criminal indictments and federal officials say undercover agents were used to bust the alleged corruption.

Frankie Dellinger, 40, a Cherryville Police Department reserve officer, Wesley Clayton Golden, 39, a reserve deputy sheriff in Gaston County and Mark Ray Hoyle, 39, were each charged in the first indictment.

Officials claim the three men worked with undercover law enforcement agents in August to provide protection for tractor-trailers hauling stolen items like televisions, cars and generators across Gaston County.  The men allegedly protected the items worth $158,000 as well as $400,000 in cash from the sale of the stolen goods.

Dellinger, Golden and Hoyle were each charged with conspiracy to transport and/or receive stolen property, four counts each of transportation of stolen property, one count of conspiracy to extort under color of official right, one count of money laundering conspiracy, four counts of money laundering and aiding and abetting, and three counts of possession of a firearm in relation to a crime of violence. Dellinger faces one additional count of extortion under color of official right.

The second indictment charges Cherryville Police Department patrol officers Casey Justin Crawford, 32, and Mauney, 23.  Hendricks, 47, of Cherryville was also charged.

In May of this year, the three men provided protection for truckloads of stolen items like TVs and chain saws worth more than $300,000, the second indictment claims.  Cash in the trucks totaled more than $300,000 as well.

The Department of Justice report states “on multiple occasions, Dellinger, Golden, Crawford and Mauney used their credentials and legal authority to assist with the transfer or transport of stolen goods and/or cash proceeds from the sale of stolen goods, in exchange for monetary bribes. Hendricks’s role in the scheme was to assist Crawford and Mauney by conducting counter-surveillance. Hoyle assisted the conspiracy by representing himself as a law enforcement officer.”

Crawford, Mauney III and Hendricks were each charged with one count of conspiracy to transport and/or receive stolen property and one count of conspiracy to extort under color of official right. Crawford is also charged with one count of program fraud bribery in connection with his role in the conspiracy.

FBI officials were seen at both Cherryville City Hall at 116 South Mountain Street and the Cherryville Police Department at 704 East Church Street as well as a nearby home on Wednesday collecting evidence.

50 Crazy Things That Obama Supporters Are Threatening To Do If Romney Wins

October 19, 2012

Michael Snyder, American Dream, Oct 19, 2012

Will cities all over America erupt in violence if Mitt Romney wins the election?  Right now we are probably witnessing the most divisive campaign in modern U.S. history, and both sides truly hate one another.  Even CNN is running articles about how polarized politics in America has become and how vicious both sides can be.

There is a lot of anger and frustration out there that has been bottled up for a long time, and this election could end up being a trigger event that releases a lot of it.  Both sides are entirely convinced that they can win this tightly contested election, and one side is going to feel bitterly disappointed when it does not happen.  Both sides are talking as if it is going to be “the end of America” or “the end of the world” if they lose this election.

This is particularly true when it comes to Obama supporters.

On social networking sites such as Twitter, many of them have actually been proclaiming that Mitt Romney wants to “exterminate black people” and many of them have been openly threatening to harm him if he does win the election.  This is a very dangerous sign, and these threats should be taken very seriously.

Of course a lot of Romney supporters are also likely to go absolutely insane if Obama ends up winning.

In fact, one Romney supporter apparently put a bullet through the window of an Obama campaign office in Denver the other day.

But when it comes to threatening to do crazy things if the election does not go their way, Obama supporters definitely take the cake.

The following are 50 crazy things that Obama supporters are threatening to do if Romney wins…

1. if romney wins i will cry in the fetal position every day (Source)

2. I’m serious: if Mitt Romney wins the presidency I’m moving to La Jolla to live in his vacant mansion #election (Source)

3. #IfObamaDontWin ima be walking around playing #2Pac with a 38 on my hip every where i go” (Source)

4. Best believe if Romney wins I’m dropping out and selling drugs (Source)

5. If romney win ima start bac robbin white folks.! (Source)

6. if Romney actually wins, I’m starting a riot (Source)

7. If Romney take away weave & my yams(foodstamps) . Ima get his White Asz (Source)

8. If Mitt Romney wins , I’m never having sex again! (Source)

9. if Romney wins and there’s a riot, I’m participating! (Source)

10. #IfObamaDontWin hell yeah America should riot and kill Romney!!! (Source)

11. if #Romney becomes president ima find away to be in the black panthers so we can take that mf out. (Source)

12. If Mitt Romney wins the election, I volunteer as tribute for the Hunger Games (Source)

13. If Romney Get Elected , The Only Hope Ima Have Is Sellin Dope ! #Gshit (Source)

14. Why ppl say if Romney win it’s back to the feilds? Lol if he win ima blow the white house up (Source)

15. If mitt Romney gets elected then ima buy all the tampons in the store!!!!!!!! And probably buy them in bulk from Sam’s club (Source)

16. If Romney takes away food stamps 2 Chainzz in this bit IMMA START A RIOT (Source)

17. If romney do win.. This riot is gon help out my christmas shoppin alot lol (Source)

18. I think we are all being too kind as Dems. If Romney wins see how kind he will be to our Middle class disappearing pockets. This is war! (Source)

19. If Romney wins I’m moving out of the country.. (Source)

20. If Romney wins who’s moving to Canada with me? (Source)

21. #IfObamaDontWin Im moving to mexico lol (Source)

22. I swear if #Romney wins Im legit packing up my stuff and moving to england!! I cant stand him! He always changes his mind! (Source)

23. #IfObamaDontWin Why hello Italy.. I’m going back. (Source)

24. If Romney wins the election I’m fleeing to Brazil after graduation. (Source)

25. #IfObamaDontWin Im Moving To Ghana (Source)

26. #IfObamaDontWin I’m Moving to Zimbabwe. (Source)

27. I’m an undecided voter. I haven’t decided where I’m moving if Romney wins. (Source)

28. My mom said if Romney wins we’re leaving the country ^.^ (Source)

29. #IfObamaDontWin people are gunna move to a different country were they can get financial help (Source)

30. I think ima start a riot if romney win. (Source)

31. Maybe workers should stand together and tell bosses if Romney wins they’re walking off the job. (Source)

32. If I see another “Romney” sign I swear ima knock it down… -_- #Obama2012 (Source)

33. Ima start stealing Romney signs for a bonfire lol (Source)

34. if romney wins our ppl will riot…. (Source)

35. If Romney became President and took away welfare Downtown Cincinnati would become a riot (Source)

36. If Mitt Romney wins come Nov. I’m becoming an Atheist Nun, just to shut-down those dickheads that want take control over me. (Source)

37. If romney becomes president just know it’s gone be a RiOT ! People can’t stand him. (Source)

38. Guys if Romney wins that means no more food stamps. The hood is about to have its own hunger games… (Source)

39. Oh wow! I heard there is gunna be a big riot if Romney wins! (Source)

40. When Romney wins, deys arl gonna riot and kill the cwacker, and da rest of da whiteys too. (I CAN’T F$KING WAIT!) I need a target rich envir (Source)

41. @FloggerBarb LMAO! Naw, my homeboy paged me. Say he gots to axe me a question about rioting #ifobamadontwinholla, jig! (Source)

42. If mitt Romney wins instead of ridin round wit da Nina we Gonn be ridin round wit dat pistol (Source)

43. Dear American pro-lifers, if Mitt Romney becomes president, I will personally abort one foetus for every vote he wins.#tryme (Source)

44. I Heard Mitt Romney , Tryna Take Away Food Stamps , If He Do .”IMA START A RIOT , IMA START A RIOT” (Source)

45. If Romney wins Ima start a riot ill burn the whole White House down (Source)

46. If Romney wins then ima take it upon myself to assassinate his ass!! (Source)

47. IF MITT ROMNEY WINS THERE WILL BE A CIVIL WAR (Source)

48. If Romney wins, I think I’ll kill myself. Can’t live through the indignity of that on top of a really crappy year. (Source)

49. I Hope The USA Is Well Aware That If In The Event This Character Romney Wins The Election, The People Will Start A Country Wide Riot! #Power (Source)

50. If Mit Romney win ima start a fucking riot str8 burning shit down (Source)

Mexico Charges Drug Gang Investigators with Cartel Ties

October 18, 2012

From Reuters News Service, October 17, 2012

Mexico has charged seven officials, including three members of the country’s organized-crime unit, with providing information on government raids and investigations to the country’s most powerful drug gang.

Cuitlahuac Salinas, head of the organized-crime unit, said on Wednesday the seven were accused of passing information to the Sinaloa cartel of Joaquin “Shorty” Guzman, Mexico’s most-wanted man.

Salinas said federal and local officials were part of the probe. One of the three accused from the organized-crime unit had also worked at the Supreme Court, he added.

Mexico’s powerful drug cartels are suspected of spending millions of dollars a year to corrupt officials, but charges are not common and officials are rarely convicted.

Guzman has made the Sinaloa cartel the country’s most powerful drug-trafficking organization since he escaped from prison in a laundry van in 2001.

In July, Mexico charged three generals, two of them retired, with having ties to cartels in what was seen as the biggest armed forces corruption case under outgoing President Felipe Calderon, who staked his reputation on bringing the gangs to heel.

 Salinas’ comments on the corruption probe followed a report by Mexican newspaper Reforma this week that one of the accused officials was close to Mexican Attorney General Marisela Morales.

Salinas denied that report, saying that officials who sell information to organized crime tended to overstate their influence within the government.

Arrest warrants were issued on June 21 and the seven officials have been held in different jails pending trials, Salinas said. Until now, authorities had not made public details of the investigation.

The former head of Mexico’s organized-crime unit was jailed in 2008, accused of taking $450,000 a month from the Sinaloa cartel.

(Reporting by Lizbeth Diaz; Writing by Michael O’Boyle; Editing by Dave Graham and Peter Cooney)

‘Fast & Furious’ Report Leaves Americans with Crucial Questions

October 18, 2012

By , October 01, 2012, FoxNews.com

Finally, the media is showing the staggering human cost of Operation Fast & Furious. But the news broadcast wasn’t in English.

Sunday, Univision, the Spanish language television network, ran a program showing the faces and stories of  dozens of people who have been killed in Mexico with guns the Obama  administration supplied to Mexican drug gangs.  One Mexican interviewed summed up the theme: “Americans aren’t moved by pain  beyond their border, only with their own.”

Americans are now getting some partial answers about Operation Fast &  Furious. The recent report by Justice Department’s Inspector General identified  Jason Weinstein as the highest-ranking DOJ employee to have been in a position  to stop the program. He has now resigned from his post as Deputy Assistant  Attorney General for the Criminal Division.

It sure is about time.

This is 34 months after Operation Fast and Furious began supplying guns to  Mexican drug gangs in October, 2009, and 22 months after one of those guns was  involved in the murder of U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry.

Ironically, at the same time that people were poring over the new report,  President Obama was denying that his administration had any responsibility for  the program. On Univision Thursday, Obama claimed: “I think it’s important for us to  understand that the Fast and Furious program was a field-initiated program begun  under the previous administration.”

Remember the strange set-up: the Obama administration was ordering gun dealers to sell gunsto  individuals the dealers feared were criminals.  Despite desparate warnings from Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and  Explosive (BATF) agents, the guns were not traced. To top it  off, Mexican officials were never informed.  The report clearly notes that the program started in October 2009.

With about 300 Mexicans also killed  and other crimes committed with weapons supplied, it is not surprising that  someone in the Obama administration had to be blamed. Yet, Inspector General’s  massive 512-page report still leaves crucial questions unanswered.

Most importantly, did knowledge of Fast & Furious reach the political  appointees in the Department of Justice, and if so, when? The report mentions  that Weinstein was briefed about the operation in weekly updates on March 4th  and 11th, 2010 (p. 257), but the report neglects to ask whether information  provided by Obama’s political appointees is at all credible.

Among the puzzles never really investigated by the Inspector General includes  briefings that Weinstein gave his boss, Lanny Breuer, in April 2010. Breuer is  the Assistant Attorney General for the Criminal Division. On April 19, 2010, the  report finds, Weinstein briefed Breuer about a related program, instituted  during the previous Bush administration, Operation Wide Receiver (pp. 73-75).  That program also “walked” guns to Mexico, though under that program there were  at least some attempts to trace the guns. Also, Mexican authorities were  informed about the program. Nevertheless, the program failed and the reason was  technical: tracing guns simply didn’t work.

The DOJ report further reveals that after the April briefing, Breuer agreed  with Weinstein that Wide Receiver was an “obviously flawed” program and ordered  Weinstein to communicate this conclusion to the BATF. Yet, the report never  questions whether Weinstein told his boss that a similar and even much more  flawed program was then being run by the Department of Justice.

If “Wide Receiver” failed in tracing the guns and was subsequently shutdown,  why would the solution be to not even bother try tracing the firearms?

If Breuer knew about Fast & Furious, that creates problems for Attorney  General Eric Holder because Breuer reports directly to him. Holder and Breuer  are extremely close, having been partners for years at a Washington law firm,  Covington & Burling.

Other than continually asserting “we found no evidence that the agents  responsible for the cases had improper motives” (e.g., pp. 298, 431, 441), the  Inspector General’s report never answers the question of why the federal  government would insist that gun dealers sell guns to Mexican drug gangs when  they knew that the guns weren’t being traced. The report concludes: “we  concluded that the conduct and supervision of the investigations was  significantly flawed.” But if the problems with the operation are so obvious to  everyone, why was it ever set up? Something more is needed than simply saying  the program was flawed.

Other documents that have been turned up in the investigation are never  mentioned in the Inspector General’s report. For example, a July 2010 memo by  Michael Walther, director of the National Drug Intelligence Center, told Holder  straw buyers in the Operation Fast and Furious case “are responsible for the  purchase of 1,500 firearms that were then supplied to the Mexican drug  trafficking cartels.”

There are other problems with the report. Three BATF managers, Phoenix Agent  in Charge Bill Newell, Supervisor Dave Voth and Case Agent Hope MacAllister,  bear much of the blame in the report, but they “contend  that the report’s conclusion thatthe strategy for Fast and Furious was hatched  in Phoenix is not true.” MacAllister says that the policy was part of an  overall BATF strategy, implying that it came directly out of Washington.

Alas, a report produced by Obama administration itself can hardly be  considered an unbiased final arbiter over whether Holder or even the president  were involved or knew about Fast & Furious.

Remember the scandal where the Obama administration replaced the Inspector  General for AmeriCorps after he filed a criminal referral against the U.S.  attorney against Sacramento Mayor Kevin Johnson, a self-described friend and  supporter of President Obama.  The administration hardly looks objective when it has been  caught coordinating press coverage of the scandal with Media Matters. And  Mexico’s government is not  just going to unquestioningly accept the report’s conclusions.

Now that Department of Justice has released its report, its high time that  President Obama stop stonewalling and grant Congress access to the documents it  badly needs to complete its own investigation. If indeed the DOJ investigation  has been thorough, what does President Obama have to hide?

John R. Lott, Jr. is a FOXNews.com  contributor. He is an economist and co-author of the just released “Debacle:  Obama’s War on Jobs and Growth and What We Can Do Now to Regain Our Future” (John Wiley & Sons, March 2012). Follow him on Twitter@johnrlottjr.

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/opinion/2012/10/01/fast-furious-report-leaves-americans-with-crucial-questions/#ixzz29exwXBOv

Univision Report Connects Operation Fast and Furious Scandal to Murders of Mexican Teenagers

October 18, 2012

From The Daily Caller, By Matthew Boyle, October 12, 2012

The Spanish language television news network Univision unleashed a bombshell  investigative report on Operation Fast and Furious Sunday evening, finding that  in January 2010 drug cartel hit men slaughtered students with weapons the  United States government allowed to flow to them across the Mexican border.

“On January 30, 2010, a commando of at least 20 hit men parked themselves  outside a birthday party of high school and college students in Villas de  Salvarcar, Ciudad Juarez,” according to a version of the Univision  report in English, on the ABC News website.

“Near midnight, the assassins, later identified as hired guns for the Mexican  cartel La Linea, broke into a one-story house and opened fire on a gathering of  nearly 60 teenagers. Outside, lookouts gunned down a screaming neighbor and  several students who had managed to escape. Fourteen young men and women were  killed, and 12 more were wounded before the hit men finally fled.”

Citing a Mexican Army document it obtained and published, Univision reported  that “[t]hree of the high caliber weapons fired that night in Villas de  Salvarcar were linked to a gun tracing operation run by the Bureau of Alcohol,  Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF).”

That operation was Fast and Furious.

The “massacre,” as Univision described it, was not the only bombshell the  network unveiled in its Sunday evening report.

“Univision News identified a total of 57 more previously unreported firearms  that were bought by straw purchasers monitored by ATF during Operation Fast and  Furious, and then recovered in Mexico in sites related to murders, kidnappings,  and at least one other massacre,” the Univision report reads.

The network also uncovered another Fast and Furious weapons “massacre.” On September 2, 2009, 18 young men were killed at  “El Aliviane, a  rehabilitation center in Ciudad Juarez,” according to the report.

Univision found many of these victims through “access to the list of serial  numbers for weapons used in Fast and Furious” and the “list of guns seized in  Mexico,” according to English subtitles on the Spanish-language video.

“After cross-referencing them both lists, it became clear that a least a  hundred of them were used in crimes of all kinds,” the subtitles read. “We found  57 weapons that were not mentioned in [the U.S.] Congress’ investigation.”

Though Univision tracked many more victims down, it said that “the death toll  that this free flow of weapons authorized by ATF had in Mexico has not been  tallied.”

Univision held nothing back in its broadcast, airing images and video of  bloodied, dead bodies. The network showed the faces of the dead and walked  viewers through how cartel operatives hunted their victims down with the weapons  President Barack Obama’s administration allowed straw buyers to traffick to  them.

One photo, for instance, showed pools of blood in the streets of a Mexican  town after a “massacre” committed by murderers armed with Fast and Furious  weapons. Video footage showed where some of the victims were killed and how the  cartels chased their helpless victims to their deaths.

The Univision broadcast implicitly suggested that Americans have no regard  for the victims of violence American policy helps fuel — that is, until one  of those victims ends up being an American.

It wasn’t until U.S. Border Patrol agent Brian Terry’s murder prompted  whistle-blowers to come forward to Congress to publicly voice concerns about ]he  program that the Obama administration stopped allowing firearms to flow into  Mexico.

One victim’s father, Mexican poet Javier Sicilia, told Univision he thinks “Americans are not often moved by the pain of those outside [their  country].”

“But they are moved by the pain of their own,” Sicilia added.

“Well, turn around and watch the massacres.”

Univision says the Obama administration’s actions “inadvertently” helped fuel  violence and a war between the cartels.

“In Mexico, the timing of the operation coincided with an upsurge of violence  in the war among the country’s strongest cartels,” according to Univision.

“In 2009, the northern Mexican states served as a battlefield for the Sinaloa  and Juarez drug trafficking organizations, and as expansion territory for the  increasingly powerful Zetas. According to documents obtained by Univision News,  from October of that year to the end of 2010, nearly 175 weapons from Operation  Fast and Furious inadvertently armed the various warring factions across  northern Mexico.”

An English-subtitled translation of one expert’s comments indicated that the  weapons the Obama administration allowed to flow to the cartels through Fast and  Furious were “capable of not only penetrating an armored vehicle but also a  whole house from wall to wall.”

According to the Univision report, it wasn’t weak gun laws that made Fast and  Furious possible, as some liberal commentators have suggested.

“If up to this point drug dealers could easily obtain and smuggle guns, the  United States government made it easier,” English subtitles on one part of the  report read.

“When Fast and Furious began in 2009, the ATF and Arizona prosecutors told  [gun] store owners to sell weapons without restrictions to suspicious  buyers.”

Univision also said that it was Phoenix ATF office leader Bill Newell who  ultimately concluded that “the only way to track the guns was to wait for  weapons to be recovered in crime scenes in Mexico.”

That charge, if true, would mean the Obama administration decided to allow  cartel operatives to kill and injure people with the weapons it gave them, and  to recover the guns only after criminals ditched them at brutal — often deadly — crime scenes.

Univision also found additional details about other gunwalking operations the  Obama administration undertook.

“In Florida, the weapons from Operation Castaway ended up in the hands of  criminals in Colombia, Honduras and Venezuela, the lead informant in the case  told Univision News in a prison interview,” the network reported. The informant  Unvision interviewed was “Vietnam veteran-turned-arms-trafficker” Hugh  Crumpler.

“When the ATF stopped me, they told me the guns were going to cartels,” Crumpler said. “The ATF knew before I knew and had been following me for a  considerable length of time. They could not have followed me for two months like  they said they did, and not know the guns were going somewhere, and not want for  that to be happening.”

Obama ‘Backdooring’ U.N. Gun Ban Deal to Abolish 2nd Amendment Rights of Americans

October 18, 2012

UN Arms Trade Treaty Lives

By Alan Korwin

The lamestream media told you:

The UN Arms Trade Treaty ended in failure, as the parties could not reach agreement before their self-imposed deadline. A dull sentiment of remorse fell over the conference as high hopes for an agreement ended dashed. Both Hillary and Barack withdrew their support in the eleventh hour when it became apparent the agreement would not be finalized. The Huffington Post blamed the Obama administration for the failure, and also the NRA which it said spread “lies”; USA Today blamed it on the U.S., Russia and China, who asked for more time to review the draft.

The Uninvited Ombudsman notes however that:

The first draft of the current effort at a UN Arms Trade Treaty was a smashing success after nearly six years of effort and a solid month of direct negotiations in New York at UN headquarters. It yielded a draft proposal with many of the most difficult terms and conditions hammered out in grueling sessions with all major parties and 170 nations represented.

This is how a treaty like this gets enacted. In fits and starts. Ideas come together over a period of years, and are gtahered in drafts and proposals like this one. We can now see how everyone is thinking — and it is not in defense of our rights. Ostensibly, the treaty is about international arms trade, but functionally, it attempts to regulate arms from top to bottom.

No one who really understands the situation seriously expected a final document to come out of these first round negotiations. Media reports however did carefully lead the uninformed public into holding out false hope for such a result, leading to a widespread sense of failure. This will help boost public support when the next effort seems to magically spring forth.

Failure was not the case however, as the positions staked out by the pro-rights and anti-rights factions became well known, and the main actors left understanding clearly where the next round of negotiations would have to go to reach an executable document.

The U.S State Dept. issued a statement with spokespersonwoman Vic Nuland’s name on it that said the U.S. supports a second round of negotiations next year. “While we sought to conclude the month’s negotiations with a treaty, more time is a reasonable request for such a complex and critical issue,” the statement said,” according to USA Today.

The British foreign secretary, a man, William Hague, according to the British “news” service The Guardian, said, “We have made huge progress. The chair’s draft treaty has our full support as well as that of the great majority of other states. But to be fully effective, the treaty will need very broad – ideally universal – participation. It is clear that more time is needed to reach the widest possible agreement.”

I usually tear these legal documents apart, and report on their content step-by-step, in plain English. That’s what my company does with gun laws: http://www.gunlaws.com/books.htm. That’s how you find out what your gun laws are locally. That’s how we support this work, and spread the word on new laws, tactics, gun-rights struggles, and a lot of other cool stuff, take a look, go ahead, I’ll wait.

I’ve read the thing cover to cover and outlined it in a general way below, since it wasn’t formally adopted. So much of the content is loose and broadly interpretable in unexpected ways that the document must be dead on arrival. If they even dreamed of enacting such sweeping language without controls, the grant of power to do virtually anything regarding guns would be absolutely dictatorial. They can’t possibly intend to do that, can they? The potential for harm to the health and sovereignty of our nation (or any nation) is so great, no freedom-oriented American could support it. But that is the draft they came up with. I linked to a copy at the end of the analysis.

All that’s left is to hold Mr. Obama, Hillary and others responsible for supporting it in the first place. Their loudly announced backing for the treaty shows their true (often hidden) colors, and their repeated tale that it would not impact gun owners, is exposed as a lie. They will erase the Second Amendment if they can, and lie about it while they’re acting.

The Guardian opined that, “This leaves the door open for further talks and a draft arms trade treaty could be brought to the 193-nation United Nations general assembly and adopted with a two-thirds majority vote. Diplomats said there could be a vote by the end of the year.” The Uninvited Ombudsman suspects that will hinge largely on the results of the U.S. elections in November.

Key Elements of the Draft Treaty

1. The treaty makes it clear that it recognizes, and that nothing in the treaty can interfere with, a nation’s right to self defense. This is one of the most dangerous aspects of the entire deal, because it refuses to recognize any element of personal self defense. Like the UN’s so-called charter of human rights, the international body has no place in its framework for people defending themselves. Given that governments are the main perpetrators of violence in the world, this is a travesty beyond measure, but the 170 nations involved are all comfortable with the plan. The nation can defend itself, but you cannot. Be afraid. Be very afraid.

2. The whole focus of the draft is to control arms for what it calls authorized and unauthorized users and also end users, which it does not define or attempt to define. This is literally carte blanche to justify any law making a nation could want for gun control. And the treaty is not written like law — it leaves almost everything up to the nation-states who agree to cooperate. What are the chances that people at mortal peril from their own “authorities” will be authorized users of arms, especially in nations where they have no right to arms in the first place? Some of the greatest abusers of human rights sit on the human rights council of the UN, so hope for an equitable outcome here are hopelessly remote. Because you have no vote, no elected representatives and no voice at the UN, chances for change to anything adopted here are zero.

3. Part of the plan is to track all arms, ammunition and parts from manufacture to disposal, through a regulatory system which is undefined. A special UN agency (the “Implementation Support Unit” with a budget, staff, reporting, etc.) will be created to do this, pulling the entire gun industry globally under its watch. Sweet, huh? It would be voluntary to start of course, because they recognize no one would cooperate otherwise (and probably won’t then either, but that’s how you get the camel’s nose under the tent, and start building a bureaucracy). This could eventually make possession of even small amounts of ammunition subject to burdensome government regulation beyond anything the worst gun-rights haters in Congress even dream about. The next treaty draft, now being dreamed up in deep dark corners of UN imaginations, will take this further.

4. There is not a single word designed to protect personal gun ownership, any individual rights, promote or encourage proper firearm use, provide accountability for governments that abuse people’s rights, or authorize people’s use of arms against governments that use arms to commit armed atrocities against their own people, although none of that is a purpose of this treaty. Typical of the UN this is about empowering government, and has virtually nothing to do with empowering the people or balancing power. That’s their way.

5. The treaty in its preamble does recognize “lawful private ownership and use of conventional arms” for “recreational, cultural, historical and sporting activities for States where such ownership and use are permitted or protected by law.” It does not include crime prevention, personal defense or resistance to tyranny (though it does say ‘among other things’, in Latin). Early talk that it would only include military weapons was false, “small arms and light weapons” are part of the package, and nations must maintain and publish a list of all such goods.

6. This is the really scary part — the way they’re thinking. Article 6 — they do make noise that it only pertains to international action, but there are holes you could drive a supply train through:

“Each State Party shall take all appropriate legislative and administrative measures necessary to implement the provisions of this Treaty and designate competent national authorities in order to have an effective, transparent and predictable national control system regulating the transfer of conventional arms.”

That’s what the “news” media means when they say the treaty is dead.

Read the dead treaty here: http://iapcar.org/?p=970