Monster Hunter Nation

Leave a Reply

28 Comments on "Another take on F&F from Bill Whittle."


Guest
Rattler25
3 years 2 months ago

I like his and your thoughts please keep them comming.

Guest
NKR
3 years 2 months ago

I love Bill Whittle! His take-down of Jon Stewart after the “Truman was a war criminal” idiocy was brilliant. I’m making my daughter watch it when they start their WWII study in middle school. He’s amazing.

Guest
bigdeville2000
3 years 2 months ago

I think the “Truman was a war criminal” response video is excellent and should be required material in every WWII history lesson. Bill Whittle is a genius.

Guest
NordRonnoc
3 years 2 months ago

I find that hard to believe there’s a gun control agenda involved.

Guest
Rattler25
3 years 2 months ago

I find it hard to be leave there is not a gun control agenda involved. Anything any government dose is because of an agenda, why is it hard to be leave that this government is any different.

Guest
3 years 2 months ago

The reason why I said that because the only evidence that I see of a gun control is the President’s claim of 90% of the weapons claimed by the Mexican cartel (which is false from what I’ve seen). Otherwise, I remain skeptical of the agenda. I don’t mean to be inflammatory in any way. If you think I do, then I apologize.

Guest
3 years 2 months ago

Also, there are a few people involved in the scandal, not the whole government. Why do you think so?

Guest
3 years 2 months ago

PS: I wished I would’ve thought of this before. Anyway, I restate my question: why do you think the whole government is involved rather than just a few people?

Guest
Tannim111
3 years 2 months ago

@ Connor

Multiple departments (Justice, State) in at least 3 different cities. Too widespread for it to be just a couple of people.

Guest
Mike
3 years 2 months ago

I’m also skeptical that gun control was the primary reason for this. I just don’t think it’s that high on anyone’s agenda. It’s more of a useful side effect.

Personally I’m pretty sure that arming the Sinoloas was the real goal of this, and that was accomplished in spades.

Guest
NKR
3 years 2 months ago

I think arming the Sinaloas was icing. What really makes the gun control angle is how they were pushing the line that American guns were driving the violence in Mexico. They knew they were the ones providing the guns to the criminals and they came out with that false propaganda. When you look at it in that context, it’s pretty damning.

It was a two-fer.

Guest
steve
3 years 2 months ago

Let’s pretend that private citizen John Doe arranged for a couple thousand guns to get to the Shinola cartel. Hundreds of Mexicans and two Federal agents’ deaths were tied to the guns.

Wouldn’t John Doe be facing federal capital murder for premeditated death of Federal agents?

Wouldn’t John doe be facing Mexican charges of premeditated murder?

Wouldn’t anyone who participated be also facing the federal capital murder charge under RICO?

Guest
3 years 2 months ago

Bill nails it pretty well, now if we could just get an indictment… sigh…

Guest
tuco
3 years 2 months ago

His (reasonable) assertion as to the mind set that casts these deaths off as “just Mexicans” holds a great deal of water, I’m afraid. There is no one who is not viewed as a pawn by this administration, including other nations and their citizens.

And if you don’t believe that this was motivated by a desire to limit gun ownership in America, you sound extremely foolish to my ears. Governments, especially ones as big as ours, fear free men and women. An unarmed populace is easier to subjugate than an armed one. Follow the ideology, indeed. Our president has had a “fuck you, I’ll do what I want” spoiled child attitude from the get go, and this is where that mindset takes you. Now he’s in trouble and he’s going to use every dirty trick and stunt to avoid paying for his choices. At least Nixon had the balls to resign, even if he never really admitted any wrongdoing.

Guest
Spencer
3 years 2 months ago

Bill Whittle’s thoughts on this expand on my original impression. There is no way this wasn’t on purpose on some level. I also find it very hard to believe that a POTUS who is involved in the day to day running’s of everything including which terrorists to kill and when knew nothing of F&F. I hope when a Judge reviews the files, if there are documents concerning the POTUS that the Judge strikes down executive privilege on the grounds that the actions were illegal. How is it legal to distribute guns to criminals with no goal other than to make a mess of things and get people killed to make guns look bad.

Guest
ZachNathanael
3 years 2 months ago

Oh mannn, thanks for tuning me in on afterburner! Never heard of it previous.

Guest
Rebus
3 years 2 months ago

Please.

OMG those guns killed 300 Mexicans! I thought people killed people and not guns? That was bullshit? Nice to know.

Now, please list every anti-gun agenda item endorsed by the Obama administration. I guess you can count his vague non-promise pre-election to get “assault weapons” banned. He do anything about that in office?

Was F&F a truly bad idea? Yes.

Should those responsible be fired and investigated for criminal charges? Yes

Did the Obama administration back it to raise an outcry that could be used to push a gun control agenda? I call bullshit. You don’t think, if he was inclined to push for anti gun measures he couldn’t drum up some support with the numerous shootings that happen in our own country? Has he done that?

The NRA has spurred gun sales with all this nonsense, which I guess is very good for the manufacturer arm of the NRA. Kinda like how gun and ammo sales went through the roof when Obama got elected. I guess that did lead to ammo being hard to buy because the paranoids bought so much they created a mini shortage. Is ammo still in short supply?

Don’t like this administration? That’s fine. They still aren’t trying to take your guns away and they aren’t going to.

PS Bill Whittle is a loon.

Guest
Guest
3 years 2 months ago

Executive privilege protects communication with the president himself. So this means that Obama is either lying and buying time, trying to put this off until after the elections, or it means he’s been lying this whole time, and that he did know about the program, the whole time.

“Also, sorry, no crack smoking here. Maybe a little buzzed on a single malt, but no crack.”

Sure, they’re just Mexicans, right? They were probably going to get killed by the drug cartels anyway, and it’s not like they are as important as real people like us Americans, right? So what if our government decided to throw a couple logs into an already raging fire, they didn’t start the fire after all, and why not use it to score some points for some pet projects?

That is what you are implying when you say there is no great evil going on here.

Guest
Rebus
3 years 2 months ago

Any flippancy on my part about the plight of Mexicans at the hands of the drug cartels is fueled only by my belief that folks that are onboard with this crackpot conspiracy theory don’t have one ounce of compassion for the Mexicans. If you really care, my apologies.

Seriously and all flippancy aside, I see stated and argued all the time that it is never the gun at fault in a shooting death. Why is it different for these guns?

Guest
3 years 2 months ago

It’s not the guns that are at fault here. It’s the people that allowed these guns to walk unsupervised. Whether it was intentional to stir up anti gun sentiment or merely pure stupidity it’s the fault of those in charge. Yes it’s not the spoon or the guns fault, but it is the fault of the person who gives the stick of Dynamite to a child. That is essentially what happened here, irresponsible adults put weapons in the hands of criminals knowing full well the deification could hit the oscillator. It’s the irresponsible adults people want to see punished that is why the gun community is outraged over this. We are all responsible with our fire arms but it appears the government isn’t and is trying to claim this is all about politics when people lost their lives.

Guest
3 years 1 month ago

Why is it different? There is a huge murder machine in Mexico, but instead of trying to stop it or distancing us from the machine, your government used your tax dollars and said “Hey I want to play, too!”

The ATF violated many laws, while at the same time, the administration was saying publicly that the violence in Mexico was our fault for having such lax gun laws. They said that we need more laws while they were simultaneously BREAKING THE LAW.

They knew that the only way to get data to justify the law was for the guns to be recovered at crime scenes. Mexico wasn’t notified and the only attempt to track the guns in mexico was murder statistics.

The ATF and Eric Holder himself used these deaths to say that we needed to pass more restrictive gun control laws. A law was presented to Congress, and was DENIED. So ATF did it anyway, just calling it a policy, just a new rule.

What was this law that all those Mexicans were sacrificed for? Was it a ban on armor piercing bullets? A ban on machine guns? Triple the Border Patrol Agents, a fifty foot wall? Nope.

It’s an extra set of forms that you need to fill out if you are buying more than one rifle in a month in the states of Arizona, New Mexico, California or Texas.

That’s it. That’s what all those people died for. A minor inconvenience and discouragement for legal gun purchasers and legal gun selllers.

I hope the families of the people killed feel good knowing that the death of their loved ones occurred so that normal people could be slightly hassled in 4 states of another country.

Yes the cartels likely would have killed those people without our guns, but by involving itself in this way, our justice department has made itself a willing accomplice to all this violence.

If a getaway driver in a liquor store robbery is culpable as an accomplice, then giving guns to known murderers would definitely make the giver an accomplice. This even applies if a government agency is doing the giving.