Baltimore Terror plot thwarted!! -1000 gallons of ……

September 9, 2019

1000 gallons of gas?

Who knew that POTUS Trump was going to be there?

 

BREAKING: Van Filled With 1,000 Gallons of Gasoline Found in Downtown Baltimore Parking Structure Ahead of Trump’s Visit

A large area of downtown Baltimore was evacuated on Monday after a van filled with 1,000 gallons of gasoline was found in a parking garage — just days before President Donald Trump is scheduled to visit the city.

President Trump will be attending the 2019 House Republican Conference Member Retreat in the city on Thursday, less than one mile from where the van was found.

Police have confirmed that there was no bomb inside the vehicle.

A search by a police robot turned up a device used for stealing diesel fuel.

 

Police were called to the parking garage of 100 E. Pratt St., where the T. Rowe Price office is, around 11 a.m. on Monday morning about the suspicious vehicle.

“After several hours of investigating a suspicious vehicle, no bomb was detected,” Baltimore Mayor Bernard C. “Jack” Young tweeted. “We are currently in the process of conducting precautionary sweeps in an effort to ensure public safety. These sweeps are expected to take several hours.”

Mayor Young asked that people remain outside the evacuated area and find alternate transportation to get home. He said that he will send out an update when people are able to pick up their vehicles.

 

No motive or explanation for the vehicle has been announced at this time.

The city police are being assisted by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

 

 


Obama should not be President – Obama is setting Israel up for a WAR and the same logic would lead to a WAR in the US – He is setting a DANGEROUS precedent

May 21, 2011

This President is dangerous to the US.  The logic that started the war in Libya has nothing to do with Gadhafi, per se.  It has to do with setting the stage.  This president is not a leader.  He IS an actor.  The stage is being prepared by others.  He is only the lead role at the moment.  And this is WHY he is dangerous.  Nothing is REAL.  It’s all staged.  No one that is a REAL player gets hurt, according to the globalists.

I’m convinced that there is a fracturing in the Globalists clique.  Some of them are Global Capitalists and others are Global Communists.  There is an ideological strife a foot. The reason I believe that is because there are leaks of information surfacing that would otherwise NOT be there.

Be that as it may, the other agents in play are the Muslims.  They are outmaneuvering the Globalists on some fronts and the Globalists are making hasty errors in judgement.  They are forced to move more quickly, but some have already made deals with the other side.  Those, I believe, are the Capitalists, because they have only one goal, money, but not money in that they have paper or stuff like that, but money in terms of true wealth and that is Control driven.  They have to get CONTROL of the commonly accepted currency, because in the end, that is their only truest commodity.

So, how does that correlate to Gadhafi and how does that set the stage for a war that the US be subjected to?

It’s the Logic.  The UN is the Global GUN.  The reason that Gadhafi was attacked is to begin to set the precedent and NO other reason.  The next casualty will be potentially Syria, in my opinion.  The following, and this may not occur until AFTER the election, is Israel.  And the reasoning is nice outlined below, in Gaffeney’s article.  However, I would take it a step farther.  The same situation is setting itself up here too, in the US.  The next casualty, may indeed be, the US.  Hezbollah and Hamas have set up shop in South America and Mexico.  They are taking over the cartels.  They got their FEET in the door by selling weapons and training the Cartels.  Now, they are tenured within those “armies.”  The same situation is setting itself up.  What difference is there in logic?  It is the same.  The Palestinian’s cry that they were removed from their land.  The Mexicans cry the same.  US children are being taught toward sedition and outright treason of their own country by “teachers” whose agenda is to overthrow the state that they teach.  Even the methods are the same between the Palestinians and what they are doing to Israel and what the “Mexican’s”  are doing to the US.   The similarities should not go unnoticed.  The fish ALWAYS stinks from the HEAD.

<thanks to Mandy for the Gaffney article.>

I would also like to mention that Obama sitting as the head of the UN security council is a direct violation of the nobility clause in Article 9 of the US CONSTITUTION.

The Senate Armed Services Committee should convene immediately to prevent Obama from using our people in his and the NWO’s war. The military should stand down.

The ATF who’s under the Homeland security, which the CIA is also under, is headed by a CZAR.  This agency is NOT steered by an elected official.  This is an appointment by the PRESIDENT.  These CZAR headed agencies have taken control of legitimate agencies and are run by executive fiat.  This is UNCONSTITUTIONAL.  How is it that they have been allowed these POWERS?  These agencies have seized control of America.  They overrule the Constitutional limitations of power.

Communist China may be bad, but America is going to be much worse, if this continues unchecked.

The Gadhafi precedent: Could attack on Libya set the stage for action against Israel?

By Frank J. Gaffney, Jr.

http://www.JewishWorldReview.com | There are many reasons to be worried about the bridge-leap the Obama administration has just undertaken in its war with Col. Moammar Gadhafi. How it will all end is just one of them.

Particularly concerning is the prospect that what we might call the Gadhafi precedent will be used in the not-too-distant future to justify and threaten the use of U.S. military forces against an American ally: Israel.

Here’s how such a seemingly impossible scenario might eventuate:

It begins with the Palestinian Authority seeking a United Nations Security Council resolution that would recognize its unilateral declaration of statehood. Three top female officials in the Obama administration reprise roles they played in the council’s recent action on Libya: U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Susan Rice, a vehement critic of Israel, urges that the United States support (or at least not veto) the Palestinians’ gambit. She is supported by the senior director for multilateral affairs at the National Security Council, Samantha Power, who in the past argued for landing a “mammoth force” of American troops to protect the Palestinians from Israel. Ditto Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, whose unalloyed sympathy for the Palestinian cause dates back at least to her days as first lady.

This resolution enjoys the support of the other four veto-wielding Security Council members – Russia, China, Britain and France – as well as all of the other nonpermanent members except India, which joins the United States in abstaining. As a result, it is adopted with overwhelming support from what is known as the “international community.”

With a stroke of the U.N.’s collective pen, substantial numbers of Israel Defense Forces (IDF) and Israeli citizens find themselves on the wrong side of internationally recognized borders. The Palestinian Authority (PA) insists on its long-standing position: The sovereign territory of Palestine must be rid of all Jews.

The Israeli government refuses to evacuate the oft-condemned “settlements” now on Palestinian land or to remove the IDF personnel, checkpoints and facilities rightly seen as vital to protecting their inhabitants and, for that matter, the Jewish state itself.

Hamas and Fatah bury the hatchet (temporarily), forging a united front and promising democratic elections in the new Palestine. There, as in Gaza – and probably elsewhere in the wake of the so-called “Arab awakening” – the winner likely will be the Muslim Brotherhood, whose Palestinian franchise is Hamas.


The unified Palestinian proto-government then seeks international help to “liberate” its land. As with the Gadhafi precedent, the first to act is the Arab League. Its members unanimously endorse the use of force to protect the “Palestinian people” and end the occupation of the West Bank by the Israelis.

Turkey, which is still a NATO ally despite its ever-more-aggressive embrace of Islamism, is joined by Britain and France – two European nations increasingly hostile to Israel – in applauding this initiative in the interest of promoting “peace.” They call on the U.N. Security Council to authorize such steps as might be necessary to enforce the Arab League’s bidding.

Once again, Team Obama’s leading ladies – Mrs. Clinton, Ms. Power and Ms. Rice – align to support the “will of the international community.” They exemplify and are prepared to enforce the president’s willingness to subordinate U.S. sovereignty to the dictates of transnationalism and his personal hostility toward Israel. The concerns of Mr. Obama’s political advisers about alienating Jewish voters on the eve of the 2012 election are trumped by presidential sympathy for the Palestinian right to a homeland.

Accordingly, hard as it may be to believe given the United States’ long-standing role as Israel’s principal ally and protector, Mr. Obama acts in accordance with the Gadhafi precedent. He warns Israel that it must take steps immediately to dismantle its unwanted presence inside the internationally recognized state of Palestine lest it face the sort of U.S.- enabled “coalition” military measures now under way in Libya. In this case, they would be aimed at neutralizing IDF forces on the West Bank – and beyond, if necessary – in order to fulfill the “will of the international community.”

Of course, such steps would not result in the ostensibly desired endgame, namely “two states living side by side in peace and security.” If the current attack on Libya entails the distinct possibility of unintended (or at least unforeseen) consequences, application of the Gadhafi precedent to Israel seems certain to produce a very different outcome from the two-state “solution”: Under present and foreseeable circumstances, it will unleash a new regional war, with possible worldwide repercussions.

At the moment, it seems unlikely that the first application in Libya of the Gadhafi precedent will have results consistent with U.S. interests. Even if a positive outcome somehow is forthcoming there, should Mr. Obama and his anti-Israel troika of female advisers be allowed, based on that precedent, to realize the foregoing hypothetical scenario, they surely would precipitate a new international conflagration, one fraught with truly horrific repercussions – for Israel, the United States and freedom-loving people elsewhere.

A Congress that was effectively sidelined by Team Obama in the current crisis had better engage fully, decisively and quickly if it is to head off such a disastrous reprise.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/gaffney032211.php3

– Here’s another article as food for thought –

WHY THE FRAMERS INCLUDED THE “NATURAL BORN CITIZEN” CLAUSE

by Tom Deacon


The greatest defeat of the American Revolution was the fall of Charleston, SC to the British in 1780

(May 16, 2010) — Section 1 ofArticle II of the United States Constitution sets forth the eligibility requirements for serving as President of the United States:

No person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.

Try to understand this: At the time of the adoption of the Constitution there were no “natural born Citizens” (no country yet = no citizens, period?), so yes, the Founders wrote in a “grandfather” clause to allow those present (already born) at the time the Constitution was signed to qualify to be president.  However, if you weren’t born yet when the Constitution was adopted (that includes Obama), then you had to be a “natural born Citizen,” meaning both parents must be U.S. citizens. It is amazing how tough this is for some people to understand. The reason Congress “investigated” McCain was because he was not born in the USA. They concluded in their report that that was OK, because his “parents” (notice the plural form of “parents”) were both U.S. Citizens.  This is not true for Obama, and he clearly was not held to the same standard.

The Constitution says you must be a natural born Citizen, or a citizen at the time the Constitution was adopted. The Founders wanted the president to be a natural born Citizen, but they recognized that there were NO natural born Citizens until after the Constitution was adopted. They didn’t know that 200+ years from the signing, the education system would have dumbed down the USA’s population to the point that understanding it was an endangered ability.

Some may believe the natural born Citizen clause isn’t fair. The Founders of our nation believed it was the right thing to do because they had just fought a war with those who had allegiance to a country other than the one they were fighting to create….that country was the one they left to come to America, namely, England.  The Founders did not want to elect a newborn to the office of the president, nor did they want to wait 35 years for a natural born Citizen to meet the age requirement to be president. So they grandfathered themselves in with the statement “or a Citizen at the time of the adoption of the Constitution.” No doubt they trusted themselves and their children who were born prior to the signing of the Constitution to be loyal only to the USA, fighting a war with England would have had that effect on them.

Obama is the “poster child’ who proves once again that the wisdom of America’s Founders was impeccable.

You can make up excuses till the earth fries from global warming, but you can’t change the truth.

http://www.thepostemail.com/2010/05/16/note-to-obama-supporters-even-a-birth-in-hawaii-is-not-enough/


Texas – Senate passes the school campus conceal carry – now it’s up to the HOUSE

May 11, 2011

Just got this from J.

Thanks

Campus Carry Language Added to Another Higher Ed Bill –

This Time Texas Senate Passes Measure!

Yesterday, state Senator Jeff Wentworth (R-San Antonio) successfully amended language allowing Concealed Handgun Licensees to protect themselves on public college and university campuses onto Senate Bill 1581, a measure authored by state Senator Steve Ogden (R-Bryan) that reforms finance methods for higher education. The Wentworth amendment was adopted by a 21 to 10 vote and then the underlying bill passed by a 19 to 12 vote. This bill now moves to the House for its consideration with the Wentworth language included. Since the House companion bill, House Bill 3639 by state Representative Jim Pitts (R-Waxahachie), already occupies a slot on the House Calendar, it is expected that SB 1581 could be expedited through the House Appropriations Committee and substituted on the House floor for HB 3639.

It is critical that you contact your state Representative and urge him or her to support the campus personal protection provisions of SB 1581/HB 3639. If you are a Concealed Handgun Licensee – even if you never intend to carry in a campus setting – you should be alarmed at hysterical nature of opponents’ arguments against this proposal and their attempts to portray fellow license holders as unlawful and irresponsible criminals! All gun owners and CHLs need to weigh in on this fundamental debate about the right of an individual – especially one who has passed a background check and completed a training course – to protect himself or herself.  Contact information for state Representative can be found here.

This alert is posted at: www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?ID=6758

Urge Your State Senator to Support HB 716,

The Feral Hog & Coyote Management Bill

Feral hogs are responsible for an estimated $400 million in direct damages in Texas every year according to several sources.  There are an estimated 1.5 to 2 million feral hogs in the state across all 254 counties.  It is also reported that for each dollar spent on feral hog control, over $7.50 is saved in agricultural products that are not destroyed by this depredating species.
Currently, helicopter aerial shooting is utilized to reduce high hog concentrations and is considered the most effective means for controlling population.  Because both feral hogs and coyotes are considered depredating species, the Texas Parks and Wildlife Code allows landowners to take them from an aircraft or airborne device on their own property, or to pay to have a “service provider” with a permit issued by the Texas Parks and Wildlife Department shoot these animals for them in the same manner.  This, however, can be quite costly for the landowner.


House Bill 716 by state Representative Sid Miller (R-Stephenville) and state Senator Troy Fraser (R-Horseshoe Bay) would allow a qualified landowner or landowner’s agent, as determined by Texas Parks & Wildlife Commission rules, to contract to participate as a shooter or observer in a helicopter to take depredating feral hogs or coyotes under the authority of a permit issued by TPWD.   This means a properly-permitted landowner or helicopter owner could contract with third parties to ride on these aircraft and participate in feral hog or coyote management operations — helping control population for the landowner, while reducing cost to the landowner.  The Commission would retain authority to ensure that these operations are run in a safe and effective manner.
Please contact your state Senator and urge him or her to support HB 716.  Contact information for Senators can be found here.

This alert is posted at: www.nraila.org/Legislation/Read.aspx?id=6755


Obama should not be president – Deception of invasion and ignoring potential terrorists

May 10, 2011

While Americans are lying up for jobs at Mc Donald’s the Democrats and other Politicians argue that Illegals take jobs that Americans simply “don’t want.”

This has been proven incorrect.

Sanctuary cities are unconstitutional.   Illegals voting is unconstitutional.  Anchor babies are unconstitutional.

All these things add up to the American inability to maintain our sovereignty.  That is a Seditious act by the president.  It’s a deliberate Dereliction of duty at the least.

Obama should be impeached for high crimes and misdemeanors.  For that and the other suspicious acts committed by him and his administration.

Mexican Border Crime Underreported

Last Updated: Mon, 05/09/2011 – 12:53pm

Bridge that connects Eagle Pass, Texas to Piedras Negras, Mexico. (Source: Time.com)

The Obama Administration is deceiving Americans by underreporting serious crime along the Mexican border, according to the Texas lawmaker who chairs a congressional Homeland Security committee.

Federal, state and local law enforcement officials who deal firsthand with violent Mexican drug cartels will deliver testimony to prove it at a special committee hearing this week titled “On the Border and in the Line of Fire: U.S. Law Enforcement, Homeland Security and Drug Cartel Violence.”

Along the border, fears are growing that the escalating drug violence in Mexico will spill into the United States.

Authorities at every level will tell the “real story” of how they are “outmanned, overpowered and in danger of losing control” of communities to “narco-terrorists,” says Michael McCaul, the Texas congressman who chairs the House Committee on Homeland Security. The lawmaker asserts that the Obama Administration “is not giving the American people a complete picture of security on our border with Mexico” and that data on crimes and violence along the southern border is “deceiving and underreported.”

Image: Suspected drug smugglers

Suspected drug smugglers

Among those scheduled to speak at Wednesday’s hearing in Washington D.C. are the director of the Department of Homeland Security’s counter narcotics enforcement office, the head of the Texas Department of Public Safety, Arizona’s attorney general and the sheriff of Zapata County Texas. Their testimony will contradict Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano’s claim that security along the Mexican border is “better now than it has ever been,” McCaul says.

The House Homeland Security committee held a similar hearing in late March to address the crisis along the southwest border. A top Homeland Security official delivered gripping information outlining how Mexcian cartel drugs, money and weapons are part of a “complex interconnected system of illicit pathways and transitional criminal organizations that span the globe.”

In a separate but related story on the administration’s handling of border security, Arizonalawmakers are seeking online donations to build fencing along the border with Mexicosince the federal government won’t do it. The plan includes using prison labor and launching a website to help raise money for the project. The state is already using donated funds to defend its immigration control law from the Obama Administration’s legal challenges.

http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2011/may/mexican-border-crime-underreported


Columbia and Venezuela – dirty deals involving Hezbollah that make Mexico into another Palestine and the US GOV. a treason ridden vipers nest.

April 17, 2011

The big question is why is Obama, and Bush before him, wheeling and dealing with Venezuela while Hezbollah does the same.  Venezuela is allowing terrorists to come in and funnel to Mexico with arms and drugs.  They are setting up ARMIES in Mexico via Venezuela.  And OBAMA HAS THE AUDACITY TO SAY, ” That he UNDERSTANDS? ” what does he understand exactly?  That he’s OK with terrorists coming in to the US?  Is that what he’s OK with?  He’s OK with Mexico becoming the next Palestine?  Because his actions and that of this Government are seemingly complicit to it.

If anything I just said doesn’t sound right.  Please, explain it to me.  Because I really don’t care about the TALK.  Talk is cheep.  The actions of this government are looking more and more seriously treasonous to me.  Tell me where I’m wrong.

Why isn’t Obama fighting Colombia’s dirty deal with Chavez?

By Jackson Diehl, Sunday, April 10, 8:00 PM

The Obama administration is about to lose an extraordinary opportunity to prosecute one of the world’s biggest drug traffickers. It will fail to break up a network that annually smuggles hundreds of tons of cocaine to the United States. And it will miss delivering a devastating blow to the most dedicated U.S. adversary in Latin America, Venezuelan strongman Hugo Chavez.

Amb. Roger Noriega: Ignoring Latin America

Vodpod videos no longer available.

You wouldn’t have known that from watching the White House meeting last week of Presidents Obama and Juan Manuel Santos of Colombia. They gathered to celebrate the completion of an “action plan” that could lead, maybe, to congressional ratification of a long-stalled free trade treaty between Colombia and the United States. Remarkably, they said nothing in public about the judgment of no-confidence Santos has made about Obama — a product of Obama’s previous neglect of a valuable ally.

In fact, the U.S.-Colombian trade plan, which leaves the treaty several steps from ratification, may matter less than the decision Santos announced two days before reaching Washington. The democratically elected Colombian leader is a graduate of the University of Kansas and a lifelong friend of the United States. He nevertheless confirmed that he will deliver a man named Walid Makled Garcia, whom Colombia arrested last August on a U.S. warrant, to his native Venezuela rather than to the United States.

Few people had heard of Makled before last year, but he has recently made himself famous thanks to a series of jailhouse interviews. In them, Makled, whom the U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration has accused of shipping up to 10 tons of cocaine a month from Venezuela to the United States, has described bribing or collaborating with scores of the highest officials of Chavez’s government — including his general in chief, the head of military intelligence, the commander of the Navy and some 40 other generals.

Makled says he has videotapes and other evidence documenting his transactions with the generals and with other senior government officials — provincial governors, members of Congress, cabinet secretaries. He says he has information aboutVenezuela’s help for Hezbollah and other Middle Eastern terrorist groups.

All this, he said repeatedly in an interview with the Univision network, “I will tell to the prosecutor” in New York, where Makled has been indicted on drug charges. That could give the Justice Department the evidence to indict, and the Treasury Department the grounds to sanction, scores of Venezuela’s top leaders.

It could also lead, as Carl Meacham of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee staff told me, to “a massive turning point in how people look at the Chavez regime.” A self-styled socialist regarded as the successor to Fidel Castro would be reborn as the heir of Manuel Noriega — ruler not of a revolution but of a narco-state.

Only Santos says he will deliver Makled to Chavez — who scurried to make an extradition request ahead of the Justice Department. Chavez, who had a falling-out with Makled when one of the trafficker’s brothers ran for office without his permission, has charged Makled with two murders. He has also offered Santos a rich array of concessions: an end to the near-state of war between their countries; payment of the nearly $1 billion Venezuela owes to Colombian exporters; the return of Colombian drug traffickers captured in Venezuela. It goes without saying that if Makled goes to Caracas, his allegations about the regime’s drug trafficking will be quickly stifled.

Why would Santos make such a dirty deal? The Colombian has been excusing himself to old American friends by saying he didn’t know how important Makled was before he promised him to Chavez at a meeting last November. In public he cites unconvincing legal technicalities. But another part of his reasoning is undoubtably a judgment about Obama.

Even while holding Santos and his predecessor Alvaro Uribe at arms’ length, the U.S. president has shown no stomach for taking on Chavez. He just spent a week touring Latin America without once mentioning Venezuela — or visiting Colombia. Santos knows what Colombia will gain from sending Makled to Venezuela — and he can guess how Chavez, who has threatened war more than once, might react if the trafficker is delivered to the United States. But would Obama really use Makled to put pressure on Chavez? Would he back up Colombia if Venezuela sent its army to the border again?

Santos guessed that Obama eschews such aggressive U.S. leadership — and it seems he was right. Though Republican members of Congress and DEA officials are seething over the Makled decision — Sen. Richard Lugar calls it “a reversal of years of cooperation” — Obama seems to have shrugged it off. According to Santos, when the Makled case came up in their White House meeting, Obama said he “understood.”

diehlj@washpost.com

http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-isnt-obama-fighting-colombias-dirty-deal/2011/04/07/AFGdwrGD_story.html


ATF – Incompetent decision making results in thousands of American weapons being “LOST” in Mexico. – They LOST track of them!

March 6, 2011

Napolitano and the whole of the decision making culprits in this should be investigated

This administration is asking the American people to ACCEPT this type of incompetence?

This is level with SEDITION or outright TREASON!

They just handed THOUSANDS of weapons OVER to Mexican drug cartels.

The next American shot or even shot at should sue the AMERICAN government AND the Mexican government.

OUTRAGEOUS!

Looking at our agents and looking at the hoodlum photos of the Drug people, we look like wimps!

U.S. Push Not Halting Guns to Mexico

Published March 05, 2011

| Associated Press

Brownsville

Brownsville

 

BROWNSVILLE, Texas — Federal agents are barely able to slow the river of American guns flowing into Mexico.

In two years, a new effort to increase inspections of travelers crossing the border has netted just 386 guns — an almost infinitesimal amount given that an estimated 2,000 slip across each day.

The problem came into sharp focus again last month when a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent was killed on a northern Mexican highway with a gun that was purchased in a town outside Fort Worth, Texas.

February 6, 2009 – Secretary Napolitano visits U.S. Customs & Border Protection headquarters and meets with CBP employees.

February 6, 2009 – Secretary Napolitano visits U.S. Customs & Border Protection headquarters and meets with CBP employees.

 

Stopping the flow of American guns, bullets and cash has long bedeviled authorities on both sides of the border.

At a White House news conference in March 2009, Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano joined President Barack Obama in announcing plans to better help Mexico cope with a brutal drug war that has now killed more than 34,000 people since 2006.

OBAMA HIT BY ROCK FROM MEXICO THAT SAYS: 'ASSASSINATIONS OF NORTH AMERICANS' CLOUD ON OTHER SIDE OF BORDER SAYS: 'NARCO-WAR IN MEXICO'

 

“You’ve got to interdict the arms. You’ve got to stop them from going into Mexico,” Napolitano said at the time.

Since then, Customs and Border Protection officers — who usually spend their days checking people and cars coming into the U.S. — have teamed up with Border Patrol agents and, sometimes, sheriff’s deputies in border communities to scrutinize travelers leaving American soil.
They have made little progress.

In fiscal year 2009, Customs and Border Protection agents at all border crossings separating the 2,000-mile border, from Brownsville on Texas’ Gulf Coast to San Diego, seized 107 guns.

The next fiscal year, ending Sept. 30, they seized 279. Those are the most-recent, border-wide figures available.

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives reported seizing 2,633 guns in 2009 at its offices in the four southwestern border states, the most recent figures available, but those were captured before making it into border traffic — and even if they had, they would have amounted to a little more than a day’s worth that get through.

 

<article from Mail Online:>

‘How could this end well?’: How the ATF ‘allowed guns to fall into the hands of the Mexican drugs cartels’

By SIMON NEVILLE
Last updated at 3:19 PM on 5th March 2011

The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms has been accused of allowing guns to slip across the border and fall into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.

The allegations made by senior agent John Dodson came after it was discovered that the gun used to kill a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement agent in Mexico was first bought in a Dallas, Texas store.

Attorney General Eric Holder has now asked top Justice Department officials to rethink their strategy against gun traffickers along the U.S. border with Mexico after some in Congress said the current strategy endangers law enforcement officers.

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent John Dodson claims he was ordered to let guns get in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms agent John Dodson claims he was ordered to let guns get in the hands of the Mexican drug cartels Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363293/U-S-Justice-Department-ordered-ATF-allow-guns-cross-border-Mexico-used-kill-American-agents.html#ixzz1FlHg5Vg8

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1363293/U-S-Justice-Department-ordered-ATF-allow-guns-cross-border-Mexico-used-kill-American-agents.html#ixzz1FlH4IIgm

 

 

A November 2008 study by The Brookings Institution, a Washington-based think tank, stated that 2,000 American guns are smuggled into Mexico each day. Compiled by a commission including ex-Mexican President Ernesto Zedillo and Thomas Pickering, a former U.S. ambassador to Russia and a senior State Department official during the administration of President Bill Clinton, the report was the last comprehensive estimate on the subject, though it did not include information on how that figure was reached.

Decapitation - 'Message to White House'....Invasion USA

THE BAD GUYS LOOK LIKE THIS -compare and contrast the photo above with Janet Napolitano -------Decapitation - 'Message to White House'....Invasion USA

THE BAD GUYS LOOK LIKE THIS -compare and contrast the photo above with Janet Napolitano -------

Efforts to halt ammunition have been more successful. Outbound border inspections seized 93,141 rounds in the last fiscal year, more than four times the amount seized during the previous year.

Seizures of cash headed into Mexico fell from more than $37 million in fiscal year 2009 to about $27.4 million last year.

The ATF is now facing criticism after both CBS News and the non-profit Center for Public Integrity reported that federal agents investigating gun-running by drug cartels allowed hundreds of guns purchased in the U.S. to go into Mexico.

The agency and prosecutors let the guns cross the border as they were building cases against traffickers, the center reported.

<THEN – THEY LOOSE TRACK OF THEM!  INCOMPETENT!  JANET NAPOLITANO SHOULD BE INVESTIGATED AS AN ENEMY OF THE STATE.  NOT ONLY IS SHE INCOMPETENT, IT SEEMS, AS IF THIS IS ON PURPOSE.  >

The ATF’s work on the border highlights the tension between short-term operations aimed at arresting low-level straw buyers — legal U.S. residents with clean records who buy weapons — and long-term ones designed to identify who is directing the gun buys.

From September 2009 to July 31 of last year alone, the Mexican government seized more than 32,000 illegal weapons, even though purchasing guns in Mexico requires permission from the country’s defense department, and even then buyers are limited to pistols of .38-caliber or less.

Not all those guns came from the United States — Mexican authorities have investigated reports that some were supplied by arms dealers in Israel and Belgium.

Many guns used to kill in Mexico never have their origins traced. Still, ATF has long estimated that of the weapons discovered at Mexican crime scenes which authorities do choose to trace, nearly 90 percent are eventually found to have been purchased in the U.S.

That was the case with the handgun found at the scene of the Feb. 15 drug cartel ambush that killed ICE Special Agent Jaime Zapata on a highway in Mexico’s San Luis Potosi state. His partner was shot twice in the leg.

Authorities say the 7.62 mm pistol was purchased in Joshua, Texas. Three Dallas-area men — one accused of buying the gun, his brother and their neighbor — are facing federal weapons charges, although none related to Zapata’s death. Investigators believe the trio on another occasion tried to sell dozens of weapons to the violent Zetas drug cartel, which recently saw one of its alleged bosses arrested in connection with Zapata’s death.

“When a U.S. agent is killed by an illegally obtained U.S. gun, it really underscores the irony of our current policy,” said David Shirk, director of the University of San Diego’s Trans-Border Institute.

“We’re not trying hard enough to stop the bad guys from using our weapons against us,” he said.

Just how much money and manpower has been spent to detect so few southbound guns, bullets and bundles of U.S. dollars is difficult to pinpoint since the Department of Homeland Security doesn’t comment on the number, location and frequency of its efforts.

However, Customs and Border Protection Commissioner Alan Bersin promised last April that at least $72.6 million would be allocated in fiscal year 2010 to hire 115 additional Customs officers and 144 new Border Patrol agents to bolster outbound operations.

The money would also have gone to improving southbound license plate-reading equipment and inspection technology.

Agency spokeswoman Kelly Ivahnenko said there were no figures on whether those staffing additions had been made, however, due in part to normal employment turnover. She said seizure numbers give only part of the picture and that stepped-up inspections have forced “smugglers to change their tactics, sometimes exposing them to other law enforcement agencies.”

Complicating agents’ hunt at the border is that most weapons and bullets are smuggled using “hormiga” or “ant” techniques, in which items are carried across in smaller amounts. Larger caches, stashed in 18-wheelers, are easier to find with X-ray equipment or sniffer dogs.

A recent visit to the Gateway Bridge border crossing in palm tree-lined Brownsville, the nation’s top spot for smuggling ammunition into Mexico, showed the daunting task facing agents: Thousands of cars and trucks and countless places to stash items.

Officers rummaged through bags of groceries and boxes of auto parts, felt around children’s seats and behind glove compartments, and poked flashlights into air conditioning vents, engine blocks and wheel-wells.

A fiber-optic scope let them peer inside gas tanks, and they checked that door handles had not been tampered with.

U.S. authorities screen certain types of Mexico-bound vehicles more than others, but won’t say which ones. Two teenagers in matching Ferrari leather jackets had their white pickup poked and prodded for nearly 10 minutes to no avail, while a woman in a Lexus sedan breezed through without looking up from texting.

At one point, a black GMC pickup on its way to Mexico attracted the attention of a federal agent.

A locked silver metal box the size of a small microwave was tucked discreetly between a cooler and a roller-suitcase in the bed. It looked like a gun case, but when opened, there were no weapons or bullets to be found.

Inside? Just an accordion.

http://www.foxnews.com/us/2011/03/05/push-halting-guns-mexico/#ixzz1Fl7siIuQ


%d bloggers like this: