Gun Control & RKBA

DanTex

(20,709 posts)

58. If you look up a few posts, you will see that Oneka highlighted this part of the passage in bold

Mon Jul 2, 2012, 05:23 PM

Jul 2012

ATF purposefully chose not to interdict guns it lawfully could have seized..

This is the exact opposite of what the Fortune investigation found. It's about as severe an example of quoting something out of context that you can imagine. For example, if I said, "some people still think the world is flat, but they are idiots", and you excerpted this as "the world is flat", that would be out of context, no matter how much you argue that really you're actually quoting the "some people" and not me.

As to why Eric Holder said that, who knows. The article hints that it was done out of political expediency. That sounds plausible. Or maybe he was referring to the guns that were intentionally walked by Agent Dodson in the one incident described in the Fortune article. Or maybe there were other isolated incidents of gunwalking by rogue agents.

In any case, what the Fortune article makes clear is that F&F was actually not a "gunwalking" operation, and that the evidence used to reach this conclusion has largely been cherry-picked, first by a right-wing gun blogger, then by gun crazies thirsty for a conspiracy theory, and finally by Republicans in congress looking to score political points. The reason they let the guns "walk" is because the couldn't legally seize them, due to the absurdly weak gun laws that are currently in place.

Could the Fortune article be wrong? Of course, anything can be wrong. But so far, it is the best researched article on F&F, and it explains a lot of things that were previously unclear. It is simply impossible to intelligently discuss F&F and gun trafficking along the border while ignoring the fact that the largest culprit is the weak gun laws, and not some strange gun-running conspiracy that was hatched by a loony right-wing militia guy.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

130 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

The Truth about Fast & Furious [View all] DanTex Jun 2012 OP

rec handmade34 Jun 2012 #1

So, suddenly Fortune magazine, Corporatist rag, is a reliable news source? Funny how that works. DonP Jun 2012 #2

LOL. The gunnies don't like it when actual reporters look into their conspiracy theories! DanTex Jun 2012 #4

No, but I expect you to keep quiet the next time somebody quotes the WSJ or Forbes DonP Jun 2012 #9

Keep that head buried in that sand! DanTex Jun 2012 #14

So being a Rhodes Scholar Oneka Jun 2012 #20

What a great pic. Gotta love her. Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #36

Actually, I **don't** gotta love anyone who inflicts serious damage Simo 1939_1940 Jul 2012 #82

Argument from authority is now acceptable if you agree with the authority? friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #81

About that "Rhodes Scholar" bit... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #84

Hmmm, a "Rhodes Scholar", eh? PavePusher Aug 2012 #127

I wonder if he has the same high opinion of all Rhodes Scholars? gejohnston Aug 2012 #128

Your understanding of journalism is on a par with your understanding of public safety. Starboard Tack Jun 2012 #35

Your understanding of public safety is on par with my cat's understanding of particle physics. Clames Jul 2012 #46

So you're saying that... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #5

The gun control freaks* would embrace FR if it claimed F&F was bogus. Canopus Jun 2012 #13

How about giving us a shout when FR says anything positive about Obama, ATF, SS, Medicaid, etc. Hoyt Jun 2012 #15

Classic ad hominem HankyDub Jun 2012 #25

Are we feeling...hungry again? beevul Jun 2012 #27

hiya! HankyDub Jun 2012 #30

Self-imposed intellectual circle-jerking. Callisto32 Jun 2012 #32

Less anger HankyDub Jun 2012 #34

I'm glad you came back with more substance gejohnston Jun 2012 #38

call me whatever you like HankyDub Jun 2012 #39

I call no one daddy, including my father. gejohnston Jun 2012 #40

LOL. A "puff piece". A "couple of ATF agents". DanTex Jun 2012 #41

CBS did a better job. gejohnston Jun 2012 #42

Who is in denial? Oneka Jun 2012 #43

and a way for those responsible to pin it on gejohnston Jun 2012 #44

This message was self-deleted by its author Tuesday Afternoon Jun 2012 #45

It's not "conditional ethics." It's "When even the wingdings can't buy the rightwing bullshit, the MADem Jun 2012 #33

Next up: How the DOJ's war on medical marijuana truedelphi Jun 2012 #3

Who was it... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jun 2012 #6

Like we all didn't know F&F was the NRA's fault. ileus Jun 2012 #7

Gun culture and their allies -- such as NRA -- damn sure did. Hoyt Jun 2012 #16

Too long to read Atypical Liberal Jun 2012 #8

read it... your question is answered in the article. SemperEadem Jun 2012 #11

It's pretty obvious to most. And it's being handled perfectly -- Obama is throwing it in face of Hoyt Jun 2012 #17

I'm basking in the glow of transparency. Atypical Liberal Jun 2012 #23

I just read that article SemperEadem Jun 2012 #10

So... Callisto32 Jun 2012 #12

To pro-gun/anti-Obama crowd, this has to be like george bush failing to find WMDs Hoyt Jun 2012 #18

What? Remmah2 Jun 2012 #29

Don't have to mention it every time because I have you conditioned to think about the no-good NRA. Hoyt Jul 2012 #68

When you mentioned mushroom cloud I thought someone was smoking them. Remmah2 Jul 2012 #71

No I was referring to george bush lies about Iraq and their "nuclear bombs." Hoyt Jul 2012 #73

Don't forget the biological and chemical WMD's Remmah2 Jul 2012 #74

maybe a few an the fringe right gejohnston Jul 2012 #66

So which is it? Oneka Jun 2012 #19

Right Wing Holder is Part of the Effort to Take Down Obama!!1@!!!1 TPaine7 Jun 2012 #21

"minor issues with the Fortune story." Oneka Jun 2012 #26

The truth is out there. Atypical Liberal Jun 2012 #24

I would have only one question for Holder gejohnston Jun 2012 #22

The idiots in question Oneka Jul 2012 #67

Intentional or accidental the results were still the same. Remmah2 Jun 2012 #28

From the article: PavePusher Jun 2012 #31

The OP seems to have found your questions inconvenient, as they have gone missing. friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #49

Yeah, typical. n/t PavePusher Jul 2012 #50

locking jpak Jun 2012 #37

Delusions of being a host... Clames Jul 2012 #47

And perhaps if his behavior didn't match Simo 1939_1940 Jul 2012 #48

It's a fascinating lie to protect shady American gun sellers. DirkGently Jul 2012 #51

So who ordered this? Oneka Jul 2012 #52

Why do you insist on quoting the article out of context? DanTex Jul 2012 #53

pushing a conspiracy theory! Oneka Jul 2012 #54

Yes, the quote is from the Fortune article, but you took it out of context. DanTex Jul 2012 #55

"Out of context" TPaine7 Jul 2012 #57

If you look up a few posts, you will see that Oneka highlighted this part of the passage in bold DanTex Jul 2012 #58

Oneka can correct me if I'm wrong, TPaine7 Jul 2012 #60

Let's try this again: we don't know why Holder said that. DanTex Jul 2012 #63

I think, rationally speaking, we have a very good idea why Holder said what he said. IT WAS TRUE. TPaine7 Jul 2012 #69

The skill you need to work on is tolerance of uncertainty. DanTex Jul 2012 #70

Translation: Oneka Jul 2012 #72

Do I smell a whiff of irony there? Euromutt Jul 2012 #79

No correction neccassarry Oneka Jul 2012 #65

Here are some questions: gejohnston Jul 2012 #61

so this Fortune article is accusing a whisleblowing agent of gejohnston Jul 2012 #75

I find it interesting that CBS news has also done a series of reports on Fast and Furious ... spin Jul 2012 #56

What I find interesting is that the very mention of guns "causing deaths"... DanTex Jul 2012 #59

Guns don't kill people; guns don't cause deaths. TPaine7 Jul 2012 #62

I don't feel that many gun owners would say that allowing firearms to end up in the hands ... spin Jul 2012 #64

Amy Goodman became loony gun blogger? gejohnston Jul 2012 #76

*That* will be ignored, as it doesn't fit the meme being pushed in the OP. friendly_iconoclast Jul 2012 #77

But... but... but... Rhodes Scholar... climate change denial... gun bloggers... right wing TPaine7 Jul 2012 #78

LOOK ME IN THE EYE.. Oneka Jul 2012 #80

An opposing view from someone in the House oversight comittee ,long read, but informative. Oneka Aug 2012 #83

LOL. "someone in the House oversight committee" = Darrell Issa DanTex Aug 2012 #85

one has supporting evidence, the other only claims it. gejohnston Aug 2012 #86

No evidence it came from Issa? Are you joking? DanTex Aug 2012 #87

you are ignoring facts, backed up by evidence presented gejohnston Aug 2012 #88

Your interlocutor relies on the argument from authority, and its flipside the genetic fallacy. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #89

The irony... DanTex Aug 2012 #91

All the better reason for you to detail the factual errors in the linked *.pdf friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #92

Wow, you are even more clueless than I thought! DanTex Aug 2012 #90

Project much? gejohnston Aug 2012 #93

This message was self-deleted by its author friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #94

Well, then- get busy fisking the document linked in post #83. Point out the errors. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #95

Sorry, I'm not going through 300 pages of right-wing propaganda... DanTex Aug 2012 #96

you don't know the difference between a magazine article and a report? gejohnston Aug 2012 #97

Ooh! Terminology! DanTex Aug 2012 #98

In other words, substance and logic are not your strong suit gejohnston Aug 2012 #99

LOL. You are slowly going off the deep end on this one. DanTex Aug 2012 #100

what conspiracy theory? gejohnston Aug 2012 #103

Your "points" are completely divorced from reality. DanTex Aug 2012 #105

you have no idea how the system works gejohnston Aug 2012 #108

This is hilarious, coming from the guy who didn't think that Darrell Issa authored of the... DanTex Aug 2012 #111

I was seeing if you could back something you said up gejohnston Aug 2012 #113

Well, at the very least I know that the Issa-Grassley report... DanTex Aug 2012 #114

Where is Cumming's document saying it is full of shit? gejohnston Aug 2012 #116

What are you talking about? DanTex Aug 2012 #119

Where is Cumming's document contradicting Issa's? gejohnston Aug 2012 #120

You should ask Cummings that question. And ask the US attorneys about the documents and the trials. DanTex Aug 2012 #123

I can reason under uncertainty quite well gejohnston Aug 2012 #124

Really? You read the whole thing? Well, I have a question. DanTex Aug 2012 #125

because I figured you didn't read it gejohnston Aug 2012 #126

You don't address the substance of what's said, but complain about the source? Genetic fallacy... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #101

LOL. You sure know your logic buzzwords! DanTex Aug 2012 #102

where is yours? gejohnston Aug 2012 #104

Theme and variation on "Eban good, Issa bad, those that question it are fools. Take my word on it". friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #106

LOL. You're failing! You won't make the 8th grade team if you can't do better than that! DanTex Aug 2012 #107

where is yours? gejohnston Aug 2012 #109

Not my job. You claim "Issa's" work is bogus, so demonstrate the bogosity. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #110

Actually, you are the one claiming Eban's work is bogus. DanTex Aug 2012 #112

Not so; I said the defense of her work by citations of her credentials is... friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #115

Of course! DanTex Aug 2012 #117

don't most investigative reporters gejohnston Aug 2012 #118

Investigative reporters speak truth. DanTex Aug 2012 #121

I haven't seen any one claiming any such thing gejohnston Aug 2012 #122

Without a dump of those "2,000 pages of confidential ATF documents", Eban is cherry-picking. friendly_iconoclast Aug 2012 #129

what a crock of shit. UnRec. Tuesday Afternoon Aug 2012 #130