Just when the Obama administration and the ATF thought that Operation Fast and Furious was a distant memory, the failed gun walking program sneaks back into the news ....
One of the guns used in the November 13, 2015 Paris terrorist attacks came from Phoenix, Arizona where the Obama administration allowed criminals to buy thousands of weapons illegally in a deadly and futile “gun-walking” operation known as “Fast and Furious.”
A Report of Investigation (ROI) filed by a case agent in the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco Firearms and Explosives (ATF) tracked the gun used in the Paris attacks to a Phoenix gun owner who sold it illegally, “off book,” Judicial Watch’s law enforcement sources confirm. Federal agents tracing the firearm also found the Phoenix gun owner to be in possession of an unregistered fully automatic weapon, according to law enforcement officials with firsthand knowledge of the investigation.
The investigative follow up of the Paris weapon consisted of tracking a paper trail using a 4473 form, which documents a gun’s ownership history by, among other things, using serial numbers. The Phoenix gun owner that the weapon was traced back to was found to have at least two federal firearms violations—for selling one weapon illegally and possessing an unregistered automatic—but no enforcement or prosecutorial action was taken against the individual.
Instead, ATF leaders went out of their way to keep the information under the radar and ensure that the gun owner’s identity was “kept quiet,” according to law enforcement sources involved with the case. “Agents were told, in the process of taking the fully auto, not to anger the seller to prevent him from going public,” a veteran law enforcement official told Judicial Watch.
It’s not clear if the agency, which is responsible for cracking down on the illegal use and trafficking of firearms, did this because the individual was involved in the Fast and Furious gun-running scheme .. . . . . .
Background and the deadly consequences of Operation Fast and Furious.
The Obama administration's plan REQUIRED a body count to further their agenda.
The Obama administration with Barack at the helm broke the middle east , with the debacles in Iraq, Libya and Syria topping the list. A list that you really won't see published because the media in America have always protected Barack Obama and his administration and will until he leaves office.
This administration armed Al Qaeda and ISIS in Syria, via a ratline of weapons from Benghazi and embarrassed themselves by drawing a mythical red line in the Syrian sand for Assad. Syria, where this administration has said they will NOT put 'boots on the ground'
Boots on the ground, like the troops Obama brought home from Iraq to keep his promise. Boots on the ground he quickly sent back in increasing numbers AFTER the election . An election the media helped Obama win by aiding the cover-up of the attack on the ILLEGAL special mission compound in Benghazi, Libya. Libya, a country that this administration helped overthrow and a country that is now a haven for ISIS and others. Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton built that.
Did someone say ISIS ..... the non-Islamic JAYVEE TEAM ?
The Pentagon pushed back Monday afternoon against criticism that deploying 250 troops to Syria constitutes mission creep in the fight against the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria (ISIS), saying the deployment is needed to meet current requirements.
“These are specific capabilities ... specific needs right now as we talk to our partners,” Pentagon press secretary Peter Cook told reporters. “And including our assessment, talking to local leaders on the ground in Syria, these are decisions that we think makes sense to accelerate this campaign and to further enable those local forces.”
"This is not a question of putting in thousands of American forces to wage this fight,” he later added. “We are looking to others to carry this fight out but to do what we can to support them.”
President Obama announced Monday he had authorized sending another 250 troops to Syria. Previously, just 50 special operations troops were in the country.
Monday’s news, coupled with the Pentagon’s announcement last week that about 200 more troops will be sent to Iraq, has led to lawmakers from both parties slamming the administration’s incremental increase in the number of troops being sent to the region.
Republicans say more are needed, and Democrats argue the gradual increases risk drawing the United States deeper into the conflicts.
Troops in Syria will not be on the front lines, Cook said, echoing the president.
Rather, their role will be to connect with, train and assist local forces, and provide intelligence from the ground, Cook said.
The Pentagon expects the troops to act similarly to the original 50 special operations forces sent in, he added.
“Force multipliers is the best way to look at this,” he said. “A small number of Americans with these kinds of capabilities can bring an enormous weight to bear in this fight and in support of these forces. And those forces who have come into contact and worked with U.S. forces, I think would attest to that.”
In additional to special operations forces, the 250 troops will include medical and logistical personnel, Cook said.
The administration settled on 250 on the recommendation of military commanders, Cook said.
Cook did not rule out the possibility of sending more troops to Iraq or Syria down the line.
“We're going to continue to look at every single opportunity we have, work with our local partners, to see how we can accelerate this campaign,” he said. “As you have seen from these specific — very specific — deployments and decisions, that what we're looking at here is specific capabilities.”
---------
What a great article on mission creep, wasn't it ? How could they talk about mission creep without ANY mention of saying there would never be boots on the ground ?
Take a look at the nuanced language used by the Nobel Peace prize winning anti-war President's team......
The State Department's top spokesman insisted Monday that the Obama administration has never promised a "no boots on the ground" strategy in Syria, even though President Obama himself has made the "no boots" promise several times over the last few years.
"There was never this 'no boots on the ground,'" spokesman John Kirby said Monday. "I don't know where this keeps coming from."
Surprised reporters noted that numerous senior officials, and even Obama himself, have said over and over that there would be "no boots" in Syria. Last year, USA Today put together a list of the 16 times Obama made the "no boots" pledge.
Kirby was pressed on the issue just hours after the Obama administration announced that 250 more special operations troops to Syria, in addition to the 50 that were sent in October.
Reporters said the 300 total troops seems to violate Obama's pledge. But Kirby said anyone who thinks the Obama administration is breaking its pledge doesn't fully understand what Obama and others meant when they said "boots on the ground."
Specifically, Kirby said the administration has always meant "boots" to mean large-scale forces.
"Tomorrow I'll speak to the American people. I'll explain this is not Iraq; this is not Afghanistan; this is not even Libya. We're not talking about — not boots on the ground. We're not talking about sustained airstrikes. We're talking about a very specific set of strikes to degrade his chemical weapons capabilities in terms of delivery."
Strange, we aren't talking about Libya either where there were no 'boots on the ground' What did 'no boots on the ground mean in 2011 ?
Robert Gates, the US secretary of defence, emphatically ruled out deploying American ground troops inside Libya as details emerged of CIA intelligence teams being sent to the country.
Gates, testifying before the House of Representatives armed services committee, repeatedly denied that there were any plans for American soldiers to go into Libya. "Not as long as I am in this job," he said at one point.
But he declined to comment on questions about CIA activities there, apparently making the distinction between intelligence teams sent into Libya and uniformed military personnel. "I can't speak to any CIA activities, but I will tell you that the president has been quite clear that in terms of the United States military there will be no boots on the ground," Gates said.
------
Boots on the ground means soldiers in uniform now and in 2011. This administration has been given a pass by its hypocritical supporters and encouraged to lie to the public because Obama and his administration will NEVER be held accountable by the fourth estate. The fourth estate are now little more than propagandists and pamphleteers for the Democratic party
