Previous Post
Next Post

Paris terrorist attack AK (courtesy

“In a Dec. 10 story, The Associated Press incorrectly reported that a gun exported by a Serbian manufacturer to a Florida-based company was involved in the Nov. 13 Paris attacks. In fact, the gun in question was not involved in the attacks and has been in Mexican government custody since March of this year, according to U.S. authorities.” Wait. What? This one gets curiouser and curiouser . . .

The AP report was based on information from the Serbian gun manufacturer Zastava, which cited to AP an advisory from the Serbian Interior Ministry. The advisory quoted Interpol authorities as saying a gun manufactured by Zastava with a particular serial number was used in Paris. The AP story should have made clear that the connection between a Zastava gun with that serial number and the Paris attacks was based only on this advisory.

Sure, OK, right. Get two sources – just like Pacino and Hoffman in All the President’s Men. Still, how did the Serbian Interior Ministry get it so wrong? Accidentally on purpose?

Zastava said it exported a gun with that serial number to Delray Beach, Florida-based Century Arms in 2013. According to the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, the gun was received by Century and eventually sent to a federal firearms licensee in the United States and purchased by an individual in February 2014. In March of this year it was recovered at a crime scene in Mexico and is still in the custody of Mexican officials, ATF said.

Hmmm. An American gun store gun finds its way to a Mexican crime scene recovered by the Mexican authorities and reported to the ATF. That, my friends, is the exact same narrative as the infamous ATF anti-gun-running gun-running operation code-named Fast and Furious. Only F&F was shut down on in 2011, after disaffected ATF agents revealed the black bag op in an online forum.

Assuming that there’s no new F&F underway, how did the Serbian Interior Ministry get it so wrong? Hanlon’s Razor suggests a misplaced digit but I’m not so sure. What are the odds of them mistaking a gun in Mexican custody for a gun used in the French terrorist attacks? History tells us that anything that involves the ATF is inherent malicious.

Serbian authorities declined to provide any additional details this week on the advisory cited by Zastava or what it was based on. Interpol said it could not provide additional material because it only acts as a clearinghouse for information among police agencies. Interpol said it would defer to the information from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives on the case.

Down the rabbit hole we go . . .

Previous Post
Next Post


    • Right.

      It does not matter what the truth is or what comes out now. The “truth” to most people is what they heard first. They heard this gun came from a dealer in Florida, and most will defend that “fact” even in the face of evidence to the contrary.

      Couple that with people believe what they want to believe, and well…the truth is out there, but often ignored.

      So, even if it does by some miracle appear in the MSM, it won’t matter to changing beliefs about the story.

      • its a sad state of affairs when the people are reluctant to believe what could honestly be a simple mistake. This doesn’t happen in a vacuum- how many time has it been discovered that the people are being lied to? That the MSM is party to this deception? The whistle blowers destroyed?

        Look at San Bernardino, eyewitness report from a woman (Sally Abdelmageed) who WAS THERE said 3 tall white men, athletically built. Now the story is 2 radicalized Islamic radicals and the FBI almost immediately released the property back to the landlord and the press destroyed a crime scene.

        So you’ll just have to excuse those people who may find this new version of the story hard to believe on its face. I mean part of this story should be the utter incompetence of authorities who get it wrong over and over again. Meanwhile, they somehow seem very efficient on infringing the rights of the people.

        • Eyewitness accounts are one thing; they can be wrong and often are.

          But the real disconnect comes when there is direct evidence of something contradicting an earlier narrative, and it is either not reported at all, not adequately reported or reported but ignored by readers/listeners.

          Either an authenticable paper trail exists for this firearm going to Florida and then to Paris or it doesn’t. Either a firearm with this serial number has been in Mexico since March or it hasn’t.

          That kind of evidence is nothing like the emotionally charged accounting of someone being shot at trying to describe who was shooting at him or her.

          The press is failing its duty to inform the public, raise questions and demand answers. The press has taken a side in the cultural debates and seeks only to push that one side. The failure of the press applies to your example as well as mine.

          The press should be just as much an “enemy” to totalitarian politicians and government agencies as the RKBA is. Both 1A and 2A serve the same purpose, just from different angles.

        • Eyewitness accounts. If 40 people witness an event you’ll get 62 versions, none of which match what happened, of the event.

          This is where the alex jones of the world get their advantage to make themselves rich and famous. They know that first accounts and eyewitness accounts are nearly worthless. From that confusion they build a “theory” and run with it.

      • “Eyewitness accounts are one thing; they can be wrong and often are.”

        Please provide examples of major events where your statement is correct.

        ps. I’m not being a smart ass I’m seriously asking

        • Every single one?

          This has been researched extensively. It’s no great secret.

          Eyewitness testimony, especially from people placed in danger that are not used to that, is among the most unreliable evidence there is.

          But, if you want a specific example just to get you started in your own self-study, check out the conflicting stories given…at the time of initial interview (ie, not changes later)…for the OKC Bombing.

          That’s why investigators look for common facts across a set of eyewitnesses, not rely on the statements of any specific eyewitness.

          You also run into the problem of eyewitnesses lying about what they saw or even that that saw anything at all. Check out the Michael Brown incident in Ferguson and the Trayvon Martin incident in Florida for two fun examples of this.

          There are many, many, many examples.

          I once testified in an armed robbery case that I (as a witness) was not sequestered which was the norm in the court district I usually testified in. As such, I sat in the courtroom and heard testimony from other witnesses (which, being typically sequestered, I usually did not get to hear). One such witness was an “Eyewitness Research Expert” and it was utterly fascinating the facts and data he shared.

          That was in the late 90’s or maybe 2000. So, the field has had an additional 15 years to mature since then, and even then, the facts he related about unreliability if eyewitness statements were pretty convincing.

        • no, of course not every single one and i think you know that. I’m getting the sense you don’t want to or can’t back up your statements and you’ve simply doubled-down

          then you try to lead us down a bunny trail with an anecdote about an unusual experience you had and what an expert said.

          If there are “many,many,many” then name one. To be clear I asked “Please provide examples of major events where your statement is correct.”

          I’d be happy with 1 or 2

          and don’t bother responding with some flippant comment about how I need to do my own research and you’re not gonna do it for me. I made some statements and backed it up with sources and you made some and didn’t and cant point to anything specific.

          on a side note, I realize something gets lost online. but to me, this is just spirited debate of sorts and I while I’m a little annoyed with your response I have no malice

  1. I miss a thing that we used to call” journalism”. People would search out facts and try to learn truth, not just repeat government talking points. Sigh.

    • I’ve got no beef with the AP’s “mistake.” What galls me is that the press loses interest so easily and fails to get to the truth of important stories. Fast and Furious being a prime example.

      • It’s no accident or unintentional apathy. Those stories which do not advance the narrative are not reported. No different than Pravda in the Cold War era.

  2. Would not believe the Mexicans have the gun until they produce it. It is possible the guns wound up on the resale market courtesy corrupt officials.

  3. is that a 5.45 rifle? ammo and mag look kinda straight for 7.62. also, why is there paper jammed in the muzzle?

    • 5.56 actually. The bullet is far too short to be 5.45 (the bullet sticks out quite a way on it).

      Plus, I’ve never seen brass cases 5.45

      • oh, i didnt know that. ive never shot 5.45 and i dont know much about it. which i guess makes me qualified to write a times editorial about it. or would have until yall educated me. damn.

    • Also if the above firearm is the one in question, it is not a Serbian Kalashnikov variant but a Romanian. I swear there is also a 3rd pin (for the auto sear) and markings on the receiver which would indicated this to be a select fire AK. No way this came the US and sold though a dealer in this condition. Look closely.

  4. What? Someone reported inaccurate facts about a gun? Color me surprised.

    It’s sad, but at this point it is just easier to assume it’s all part of a consparicy. I generally avoid donning the tinfoil headwear, but at some point it can’t all be unrelated incidents.

    Umpqua shooter’s photos were altered to lighten his skin color so he could be passed off as white instead of Muslim. We were told It was our fault even though he was a terrorist.

    The F&F program was designed, just as operation Choke Point to target legal firearms manufacturers, dealers, and owners to make us look bad and become a hurdle to keep others from joining us.

    Even Benghazi was blamed for a YouTube video (who’s creator is currently in jail for making the video, one promise Hillary kept.) when emails suggest it was due to state department gun running to Libyan rebels.

    We are being lied to at every turn and its just easier to assume it’s all related at this point

    • “..creator is currently in jail for making the video…”

      Actually the guy who created the Benghazi video was charged with probation violations. In 2012, he pleaded guilty to 4 of the 8 charges and served one year in prison. He is now released and has been under supervised probation since 2013.

  5. Oh yeah the gubmint don’t tell you nuttin’…does everyone believe the Colorado movie shooting? Newtown? JFK? No? Because GUNZ…

  6. No one noticed that ak is an sbr? Those arent sold thru century. Have to have a tax stamp for fold out tantal style stock. Look at barrel length.

    • The pictured AK is an export version Romanian AIMR, and is select fire. For U.S. descriptive purposes, it’s a machine gun.

  7. Most of the press (and yes, this goes for both sides of the gun debate) tends to jump on whichever purported facts fit their point of view. AK-pattern rifles initially shipped to a dealer with a checkered past in Florida? The writers must have fainted upon hearing about it at first.

    What’s sad is that the AP used to be “the” source, even when everyone else went biased.

    Nowadays the best source is citizen journalism. Find someone who uploads the clearest video/audio and make your own decisions.

  8. Sooo….instead of the Muzzies getting the gun at Indy gun show, Mexicans showed up first and bought it. Ooookay.

Comments are closed.