Okay, so we’ve established that, contrary to what the ATF, the Mexican and American governments and the mainstream media would have us believe, there is no “River of Guns” flowing from gun shows and legit gun dealers in the U.S. to Mexico. Furthermore, we’ve noted that most of the weapons the cartels do have came from “official” sources, such as government agencies, corrupt law enforcement officials and the like. This was confirmed, in a weird way, by the head of the Los Zetas drug cartel, who insists that he bought his weapons legally, in the United States . . .

Now it’s not much of a stretch to presume that a cartel honcho would lie. (Like politicians, if they’re mouths are moving, you can be sure that whatever comes out needs a wee bit o’ fact-checking.) But this sounds like a whopper – I mean, why/how/to what purpose would an agency of the U.S. Government sell weapons to a Mexican drug cartel? It sounds too incredible (and stupid) to be true, right? But no, apparently, the Zeta honcho was giving us the straight skinny. So where did they get those wonderful toys?  Time to give thanks to a program administered by Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Yep. Belly up to the bar boys. Today’s smokin’ gun implicates the U.S. State Department.

Okay, bear with me on this. And first of all, a tip 0′ the hat to the excellent work by Anthony Martin at the Conservative Examiner, a guy who’s quickly giving our journalistic heroes David Codrea and Mike Vanderbeogh, a run for their money. Now for a little background to set the stage: Mexico has three main players in it’s drug-fueled passion play. There’s the (unbelievably corrupt) Mexican government, led by Filipe Calderón. Then there are the two largest drug cartels – the Sinaloa cartel (in bed with the Calderón administration by all counts), and the competing Los Zetas cartel. (There are smaller ones, too, but for the purposes of this discussion, they aren’t that big a deal.) Calderón and Company are waging war on the Zetas, and apparently turning a blind eye to the activities of the Sinaloas. Nice.

In political science 101, we learn that when a group is out-gunned and out-manned, the favorite maneuver is something called “Expanding the Conflict.” In schoolyard terms it means to hire/involve/enlist the help of another big kid/bully to help you defend yourself against the guy or guys that have been picking on you. It’s even better when you can bring in a third-party that’s got access to some serious, smokin’ weaponry. And better still if the third-party is clueless (or pretends to be) about your need for a high-caliber arsenal. Enter the U.S. State Department and their program called “U.S. Direct Commercial Sales.”

According to Martin, the program was intended to regulate the sale of U.S. firearms to other countries. So by “regulate” they mean “allow the weapons to flow freely into Mexico?” For profit? Oh, wait. I get it. Perhaps the Obama Administration’s grand design is based on the time-honored, schoolyard strategy, “let’s you and him fight,” whereby they arm the Zetas and let Los Zetas and the Sinaloas destroy each other. Good plan that. What about all that messy “collateral damage?

Lest you think this some flight of fancy on the part of Conservative journalists, check this out: The Zeta El Jeffe insists that ALL of their weapons were sold to them through this program. No “gun show loopholes” or “illegal gun activity” going on here. The U.S. sold them their guns through our very own State Department.

But wait, you say. Isn’t this program supposed to sell guns directly to foreign governments? How is it that the State Department sold guns directly to a drug cartel? I’d like the answer to that one. Perhaps Hillary has expanded the definition of “foreign government” to consider a cartel a “foreign power.” You know. Kinda like “it depends on what the definition of ‘is’ is?”

Here’s how it went down: The cartel bought their guns through U.S. Commercial Sales, out of Dallas. The Zetas use the convenient Meacham Field in nearby Fort Worth, to transport the guns back to Mexico. Which is interesting, because it’s the same field used by the DEA. Curiouser and curiouser.

It gets better. The cartel bought a cozy little place to set up a warehouse/munitions depot in Columbus, New Mexico. Yeah. THAT Columbus, New Mexico. The Columbus, New Mexico that just fired their entire police department for selling guns to the drug cartels. 

Oh, man, does this stink on ICE or what? How can we even begin to talk about “secure borders” when we are letting the drug cartels bloody well set up shop this side of the border, to run guns to Mexico? What in the Wide, Wide World of Sports is a-goin’ on here?

So let’s recap. We’ve succeeded in exposing even more crazy. We’ve added yet again another theory to the mix (“let’s you and him fight” where the two cartels blow the ever-lovin’ crap outta each other, making it easier for us to pick off the winner?). The ATF was not the only ones running guns to Mexico. Apparently the State Department was playing, too. And then consider this angle – was the State Department competing with the ATF for the hearts and minds of the Mexican drug trade?

I know that sounds whacked, but if the ATF is supplying the Sinaloas (with Calderón’s tacit approval and/or help) and State is playing for the Zetas, where does that leave the rest of America? (And for that matter, did you think you’d ever read a story in the Death Watch series that actually makes somebody look more clueless than the ATF?)

Remember that Paul Newman/Sally Field flick, Absence of Malice? Newman played an innocent guy – who happened to be the son of a Mafioso. The Feds targeted him, and tried to use him as a lever to get to the mob. But he fought back. In a climactic scene, An Assistant U.S. Attorney General (played by Wilford Brimley) comes in from the Dept. of Justice and has a little chin-wag with the D.A. and the other players. He utters this immortal bit of dialog:

Now we’ll talk all day if you want to. But, come sundown, there’s gonna be two things true that ain’t true now. One is that the United States Department of Justice is goin’ to know what in the good Christ – e’scuse me, Angie – is goin’ on around here. And the other’s I’m gonna have somebody’s ass in muh briefcase.

I long for those days, if ever they existed. For here in the real world, the AG’s office is up to their ass in this mess. As is the Secretary of State, the ATF, the FBI, and apparently the U.S. Customs, Border Patrol, and local police. I guess that leaves us wondering, is there ANYbody in government we can trust anymore? 

20 Responses to ATF Death Watch 42: Where Did They Get Those Wonderful Toys?

  1. Very interesting. My guess is that State is using the profit along with a cut of the drug profits to fund covert operations, I mean kinetic action, I mean regime change, I mean nation building. Smells a lot like Iran-Contra and this is the Hassenfuss moment.
    They are all cut from the same cloth, be it Repub. or Demo. “National Defense” translates as protection of corporate profits and the status quo.

  2. In a twisted kind of way I find this news to be something of a relief. If it turns out that this was a lethally wrongheaded and incredibly stupid attempt to damage drug cartels that’s at least a little better than it being a lethally wrongheaded and incredibly stupid attempt to pass new domestic gun-control laws.

    • Actually, to me, it looks like a ‘two birds/one stone’ scenario. Someone (pentagon think-tank?) comes up with the plan to play the cartels off of each other. Someone else (whitehouse?) notices that by following the think-tank plan, then the meme of American guns fueling Mexican violence can be advanced to limit civilian gun rights. Two birds. Collateral damage be damned.

      • The real shame here is that my “glass half full” scenario is still hopelessly, criminally AFU.

    • This was a fascinating report. Looking exclusively at Mexico for the last 14 years, the description of rifles and other firearms changes from year to year and remains relatively small (a few thousand at most) until the last few years. In 2008, there are just over 15,000 “Firearms and other weapons” listed. In 2009, there is a massive drop—179 “Firearms and other weapons”, as well as 1361 “Fully automatic firearms.” Something crazy happens in 2010. Last year, under the heading of “Category I Firearms, close assault weapons, and combat shotguns”, the number is 2,547,074! Whoever received all of those guns had better be expert shots, though. According to the report, there were sales of ~11.3 million units of “Ammunition/Ordinance.” That only works out to about 4.5 rounds per gun.

  3. I have an easy solution to this. Raise taxes. How will this work? I have no idea but I promise you someone will propose something that requires raising taxes so we can start a new Bureau that will prevent things like this from happening. In 20 years that Bureau will be caught doing something it shouldn’t be and we’ll have to start a new Bureau to watch them. Rinse repeat. Our governments solution to everything is “spend more money!”

  4. Dear god, I can’t stop facepalming.

    Also: Calderon, not Colderon(that’d be a frozen Tobleron I’d imagine)

  5. I said a long time agothat our govt was too corrupt tocorrect it peacefully. We are headedinto an unavoidablecivil war.I believeObamawill seize powerand essentially be a dictateruntil he’s killed. Its gonna get ugly.

    • You’d be hard-pressed to find someone more reflexively distrustful of government or openly contemptuous of President Obama than I am, but talk like is unhelpful and illogical. All it does is play into the hands of those who like to peddle the “gun owners are lunatics” stereotype.

      How exactly could Obama “seize” power? Is the entire US military going to back him up on that, along with every LEO? Hell, is his own secret service even going to back him up? Don’t you think that when he stands up and proclaims himself dictator that one of them will just chuckle a little and then put cuffs on him?

      There’s no need for any civil wars. The only thing we need to do is stop voting for politicians (in both parties) who value their own enrichment over the good of the nation. If we as a nation had the will to do it we could replace the entire Legislative and Executive branch in just six years. And face it, if the American people lack the will to do that then they surely lack the will to re-enact Lexington and Concord.

  6. “is there ANYbody in government we can trust anymore?”

    Where have you been? There hasn’t been anybody in government that we could trust since George Freakin’ Washington.

  7. “I guess that leaves us wondering, is there ANYbody in government we can trust anymore?”

    Just Ron Paul.

  8. I think it is high time that I announce my intentions to run for the office of President of the United States and Emperor of Mexico…

  9. Have we all forgot the Zimmerman Telegraham. They are arming them selfs for the invasion if we go to war with Germany.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *