Posts Tagged ‘FBI’

Targeted by? You guessed it!

June 17, 2014

ssued following this month’s Las Vegas killings, a bulletin leaked from the New York State Intelligence Center has warned state law enforcement against a “recent spike in violence” targeting them, and cites a figure familiar to Gun Rights Examiner readers as a catalyst for inspiring those so inclined.

“Michael Brian Vanderboegh, a longtime militia member and founder of the III Percent Patriot Movement which was supported by Jerad and Amanda Miller, travelled to NYS at least once in 2013 to speak to the Liberty Oath Keepers meeting in Monticello, NY.,” the “official use only” bulletin marked “Not for public or media release” advises. “The III Percent Patriots are a militia group comprised primarily of gun rights extremists who believe in the need to use violence against the government to prevent what they believe to be an impending seizure of all private firearms.

“The name derives from ‘an obscure, and not particularly accurate, Revolutionary War “statistic” that claimed that only 3% of the American population during the Revolutionary War participated as combatants in the war,” it explains. “The Oath Keepers is an organization composed of current and former military and law enforcement personnel who take a pledge to ‘not obey unconstitutional orders such as orders to disarm the American people, to conduct warrantless searches, or to detain Americans as enemy combatants.’

“There have been multiple observed instances of overlapping membership in the Oath Keepers and the III Percent Patriots, and the Oath Keepers’ founder has spoken supportively of the III Percent Patriot Movement,” the section concludes.

Footnotes make it clear the “information” is being sourced from the Southern Poverty Law Center and the Anti-Defamation League, both “progressive” groups vehemently anti-gun, at least the privately-owned kind, and neither shy about portraying their ideological opponents as domestic terrorists. (SPLC’s attacks on Oath Keepers have been documented in this column for years.)

While some are claiming New York is behind the curve because the FBI has distanced itself from SPLC, that may be wishful thinking based on a website modification.

[A] public statement from the FBI and the agency’s own website indicate the removal may mean just that — removal from the site, not a diminishing of the relationship between the two organizations,” a HotAir article cautions. “[T]he spokesperson’s statement indicates the change may just be a public relations move, not a substantive shift in FBI policy.”

Regardless, Vanderboegh decimated the bulletin in his Flag Day Second Amendment Rally speech in Massachusetts on Saturday.

“The Millers are linked to the Bundys — except they’re not,” he said recapping the bulletin after dissecting it for the crowd. “The Millers were supporters of Vanderboegh, the guy who had them ejected from the Bundy security operation — except they weren’t.

“They embraced militia values — except they didn’t, the Three Percent movement is a militia — except it isn’t.” he continued. “And the Three Percent are paranoids for believing that the New York state cops are going to seize semi-auto weapons — except they are.

“Other than that, this is a totally accurate report, Vanderboegh observed. “Does that clear things up for you?

“It’s funny but it’s not,” he cautioned. “This report goes out to police everywhere. Many are going to accept it as gospel. And who do you think they’re going to be reporting? You, with the Oath Keepers tee shirt. You, with the Three Percent patch. You, with the Gadsden flag out in front of your house or the ‘Don’t tread on me’ sticker on your pickup truck. Because everyone now ‘knows’ because of sloppy propaganda like this piece of trash that the Gadsden flag equals Three Percent equals Oath Keeper equals domestic terrorist equals meth-head cop killer.”

That, of course, is the objective, and even clumsier propaganda has been seized on by groups that are desperate for attention and relevance, coming up with stupid slogans like “Let’s tread on them” accompanied by even more stupid graphics.

It’s part of a long-standing and not particularly successful attempt by the “progressives” to chill dissent by making gun owners fear to speak out lest they be tarred with the brush of extremist. Perversely, those who want them to feel that way have been known to come up with extremist advocacy positions like ‘Isn’t it time we started rounding up promoters of hate before they kill?” and “These town hall terrorists could be declared enemy combatants and bundled off to Bagram with the stroke of a pen. If ever there were a reason for suspending civil rights, this is it,” and “Send the guilty monsters directly to Guantanamo Bay for all eternity and let them rot in their own mental squalor.”

As Vanderboegh might say, it’s funny, because of the personal frustrated impotence of the defective cultists doing the demanding, but it’s not, because their voices influence weak minds and embolden politicians, and enable enforcers who then cynically justify terror tactics they’re increasingly confident in using.

“Law enforcement leaders from the Department of Justice, the FBI, the ATF, Chicago police and other regional agencies gathered for a show and tell … of what they believe can be a key tool to reducing gun violence and arresting people who use and sell illegal guns — a group they call ‘three percenters’,” WGN reported.

“The core mission of the Crime Gun Center is to identify these shooters, or these ‘three percenters,’ and the traffickers that sell them guns and get them off our streets,” ATF Special Agent in Charge Carl Vasilko explained.

That’s what ATF has decided to call violent criminals who use guns? Does anyone think the adoption of that name is just a coincidence, coming from the machine Vanderboegh embarrassed with his groundbreaking Operation Fast and Furious revelations and efforts? And curiously, although not surprisingly, its being directed by agents of an administration that is more than happy to befriend extremist “percenters” it approves of.


Obama Goes Nuts and Offers Anti-gunners Wish List

January 18, 2013
Most of his crazy proposals are so extreme,
only few of his initiatives pose serious threat
Surrounded by child-props, Barack Obama yesterday proposed a semi-automatic ban so extreme that it could potentially outlaw up to 50% of all long guns in circulation and up to 80% of all handguns.
Originally, Obama’s allies had announced they would reintroduce the 1994 ban on commonly-owned, defensive firearms.  That was until they found out that they would look like fools, since that semi-auto ban was largely the law of Connecticut on the day the Newtown shooting occurred — and didn’t cover Adam Lanza’s AR-15.  After that, gun grabbers just kept adding more and more guns until they would register (or ban) a huge percentage of the defensive guns in existence.
So where are we now?
Obama’s crazy gun ban is now being denounced by many Democrats. And, although you don’t “pop the cork” until Congress adjourns, it will probably take the magazine ban down the toilet with it.
This means that gun owners’ focus must now shift to the part of Obama’s agenda which poses the most danger because it is most likely to move:  the requirement that the government approve every gun transfer in America — the so-called universal background check.
All of you know why this is a problem.  But how do you explain it so simply that even a congressman can understand?  Let’s take a crack at that:
The FBI’s database currently contains the names of more than 150,000 veterans.  They served their country honorably.  They did nothing wrong.  But, because they sought counseling for a traumatic experience while risking their lives for America, they have had their constitutional rights summarily revoked, with no due process whatsoever.
You want to know something else?  The “secret list” could soon include tens of millions of Americans — including soldiers, police, and fire fighters — with Post Traumatic Stress Disorder, attention deficit and hyperactivity disorder, and even post-partem depression.  This would be achieved under the 23 anti-gun “executive actions” that Obama announced yesterday.
Our legislative counsel drafted the Smith amendment in 1998 to prohibit the FBI from using the Brady Check system to tax gun buyers or put their names into a gun registry.  But the FBI refuses to tell us — or even to tell U.S. Senators — how (or whether) it is complying with the Smith amendment.  Why in the world should we give the FBI more authority and more names if it abuses the authority it already has?
This is the inherent problem with any background check, where gun buyers’ names are given to a government bureaucrat.  Is there any way to make sure that once a name is entered into a computer, that it doesn’t stay there permanently?
This concern is especially valid, considering how federal agents are already skirting the laws against gun owner registration.  Several dealers around the country have informed GOA that the ATF is increasingly going into gun shops and just xeroxing all of the 4473’s, giving them the names of every gun owner who purchased a gun through that shop — and setting up the basis for a national registration system.
This is illegal under the 1986 McClure-Volkmer law, but that has apparently not stopped it from being done.  If every gun in America has to go through a dealer, this will create a mechanism to compile a list of every gun owner in America.  And, as we have seen with New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, who has just been legislatively handed such a list, when that happens, the talk immediately turns to “confiscation.”
As alluded to above, New York Governor Andrew Cuomo now has a comprehensive gun registry.  This is the most dangerous thing that New York legislators could have done — as Cuomo has made it clear he’s considering gun confiscation of lawfully-owned firearms.
“I don’t think legitimate sportsmen are going to say, ‘I need an assault weapon to go hunting,’” Cuomo said.  “Confiscation could be an option. Mandatory sale to the state could be an option. Permitting could be an option — keep your gun but permit it.”
How nice.  He’ll let gun owners “permit” their guns for now — so that, presumably, they can be confiscated later, just as certain defensive weapons were confiscated in New York City during the Mayor David Dinkins administration in 1991.
The Brady Law requires that the FBI correct erroneous denials of firearms purchases.  And it requires that it reply, initially, within five days.  According to attorneys familiar with the problem, the FBI NEVER, EVER, EVER complies with the law.  In fact, it increasingly tells aggrieved legitimate purchasers to “sue us” — at a potential cost of tens of thousands of dollars.
Since its inception, the FBI’s computer systems have often gone offline for hours at a time — sometimes for days.  And when it fails on weekends, it results in the virtual blackout of gun sales at gun shows across the country.
According to gun laws expert Alan Korwin, “With the NICS computer out of commission, the only place you could legally buy a firearm — in the whole country — was from a private individual, since all dealers were locked out of business by the FBI’s computer problem.”
Of course, now the President wants to eliminate that last bastion of freedom!
Recently, the FBI’s system went down on Black Friday, angering many gun dealers and gun buyers around the country.  “It means we can’t sell no damn guns,” said Rick Lozier, a manager at Van Raymond Outfitters in Maine.  “If we can’t call it in, we can’t sell a gun.  It’s cost us some money.”
The bottom line:  Our goal is to insure that Obama’s politicized dog-and-pony show doesn’t produce one word of new gun law.  Not a single word.
And the biggest danger right now is universal background checks — which would create a platform for national registration and confiscation.
We would note that, in addition, Obama is attempting to illegally enact gun control through unlawful and unconstitutional “executive actions.”  Click here to read about these.
ACTION:  Click here to contact your senators and congressman.  Urge them to oppose the universal background check because it is a platform for national firearms registration and confiscation.

Will Congress Lay the Groundwork for Gun Confiscation?

April 17, 2011
Within the next 90 days, Congress will vote on whether to reauthorize legislation to specifically allow the government potential access to millions of gun records (4473’s).
Historically, gun registration has been a prelude to gun confiscation.  Almost 20 years ago, JPFO (Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership) documented how several foreign governments in the Twentieth Century had used gun control — and quite often gun registration — to confiscate firearms.  In each case, such gun confiscation was a prelude to genocide.
Currently in the United States, the 4473 forms that gun buyers fill out are stored at gun dealers’ shops.  But provisions in the PATRIOT Act (which sunset soon) specifically allow the FBI to seize these gun records under certain conditions.
We now have a unique opportunity to make sure these dangerous provisions expire — or to exempt gun records from the reach of the government.
Click here to see what you can do to protect our liberties!

Rogue Agency still at it…

March 20, 2011
Seems that the rogue agency that has done more to destroy liberty and freedom than any other is now not just killing religious people, but even our own border warriors.
Many have been calling for the utter abolishment of the BATFE, and for good reasons. This situation should enrage every American, and especially those involved in public safety. Yes, once again I implore each of you to contact your elected leaders.
(February 23, 2011)

“Two months after the shooting death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry, the FBI and the U.S. Attorney’s Office remain silent. But family members, and others, are speaking out.”
— William Lajeunesse, “America’s Third War: Agent Brian Terry, A Policy of Silence?,” Fox News (February 22, 2011) at


According to recent press reports — such as Fox News — the ATF has enabled gun smuggling by telling gun dealers in the southwest to sell weapons to known straw purchasers (people who buy guns for others).  Even worse, one of those guns became the murder weapon in a tragic case where a Border Patrol agent, Brian Terry, was gunned down on December 14th, 2010.

This ATF operation is called Project Gunrunner and its purpose was to monitor illicit gun sales in the southwest in order to track down the smuggling rings delivering guns to the drug cartels.

But, now, it’s beginning to look like the biggest arms supplier is the ATF itself for having allowed more than 3000 weapons to be smuggled under its Gunrunner program.

While Senator Charles Grassley (R-IA) has demanded answers from the ATF, he has been blown off — not only by agency superiors, but by officials as high up as Attorney General Eric Holder.

Given the fact that Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is likely to drag his feet in order to protect Attorney General Eric Holder, we believe that hearings should begin in the U.S. House of Representatives.

Thus, Gun Owners of America is now calling for both the Judiciary Committee and the Committee on Oversight and Reform in the U.S. House of Representatives to initiate hearings into Project Gunrunner — and presents the following information to help in their investigations.


“The gun used to kill Agent Brian Terry has been sourced, not to Mexico, but to a gun store in Phoenix that was actually part — and cooperating — with a federal investigation into arms trafficking.  However, US agents did not stop the sale or the transfer of that gun to the cartels that killed Terry.”
— William Lajeunesse, Fox News broadcast (February 22, 2011)

Around 11:00 pm on the night of December 14, 2010, Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was shot and mortally wounded near Peck Canyon, Rio Rico, north of Nogales in Santa Cruz County, Arizona, approximately 10 miles north of the U.S.-Mexican border.  Agent Terry, aged 40, a Marine Corps veteran and a “cop’s cop,” died shortly afterward.  Four suspects were taken into custody, including one who was shot and transported to the hospital.

Two months after the murder, the U.S. Attorney’s office in Phoenix announced that three of the four, Jesus Soria-Ruiz, Jose Angel-Camacho, and Francisco Rosario Camacho-Alameda would be deported to Mexico after pleading guilty to charges of illegal entry.   As of this writing (February 23, 2011), they have been released for deportation.

Despite being arrested at the scene, it was announced that no evidence tied the three to the shooting of Agent Terry.  This is amazing.  Should not these illegal aliens be kept in custody as witnesses?  At best, they are material witnesses … at worst, they are perpetrators who assisted in the murder of Agent Terry.

To date no one has been charged with the murder and the FBI has been uncharacteristically tight-lipped about the investigation, except to assure that Terry was not killed by friendly fire from fellow agents.  (It is the opinion of many — not only those here at GOA, but also the whistleblowers — that because these Mexican citizens have potential knowledge as material witnesses in the case, they should not be deported and, instead, should be kept in protective custody until they can be made available to independent Congressional investigators.)

Two semi-automatic Kalashnikov-pattern rifles were found at the scene.  When traced, it was discovered that these had been purchased from an American gun shop which had been cooperating with agents of the Phoenix office of the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (commonly referred to as the ATF) in an investigation of gun smuggling known as Project Gunrunner.  It was also learned that these weapons had been traced by the ATF at least once before, and that the agency had extensive knowledge of the person who bought them.

Almost immediately, rumors began to circulate within the agency that the Phoenix office of ATF had botched the oversight and execution of Project Gunrunner, and that the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry was an unintended but foreseeable consequence of poor planning, sloppy field craft and even sloppier management.  Such a tragedy, it was said, had even been predicted by some agents beforehand.

Worse, both street agents and responsible supervisors within the agency had tried to prevent such an outcome and were overruled by higher management.  In the case of one, Darren Gil, the ATF attaché in Mexico City who went over the head of Phoenix Special Agent in Charge, William Newell, to ATF headquarters, such fidelity to duty was a career-ending act.  Gil was forced into early retirement on December 31, 2010, two and a half weeks after the murder of Brian Terry.

Gil was removed, at least in part, because he insisted that pursuant to treaty and established protocol, the Mexican government should be notified of the operation.  It was not.  The decision to remove Darren Gil and keep the Mexican government in the dark was approved, it is said, at least at the highest levels of the Justice Department.

There are now five separate but connected accusations leveled by current or former employees of the ATF against ATF and DOJ officials in what has been dubbed the “Project Gunwalker“ Scandal:

First, that they intentionally allowed perhaps as many as 3,000 firearms to “walk” across the U.S. border into Mexico with the purpose of boosting the statistics of seized firearms with American commercial provenance from Mexican crime scenes.

Second, that they instructed U.S. gun dealers to proceed with questionable and illegal sales of firearms to suspected gunrunners.

Third, that they intentionally withheld information about U.S.-sanctioned gun smuggling from the Mexican government.

Fourth, that one of the rifles ATF allowed to be smuggled into Mexico was involved in the death of CBP Agent Brian Terry.  (See the link to Grassley’s February 9 letter in the footnotes below.)

Fifth, that high-level managers of ATF and DOJ are now, in tandem with the FBI, involved in covering up ATF and DOJ culpability in items One through Four, by various means including the unlawful threatening of current-serving ATF agents with personal knowledge of the case.

Eventually, these charges came to the attention of U.S. Senators Jeff Sessions of Alabama and Chuck Grassley of Iowa through the new media which learned of the existence of potential whistleblowers from its own sources within ATF.  The Senators then got in touch with the whistleblowers, so that they could be afforded some protection from the threats of their managers and so that the truth of the circumstances of the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry could be discovered.

The story is starting to get out.  As stated on February 22 by William Lajeunesse of Fox News:  “The slug that killed Terry came from an AK-47 dropped at the scene. The weapon was traced to a Phoenix gun store, which had reported the sale to ATF’s ‘Project Gunrunner.’”

At present, many other revelations are expected.

This study will present a background, narrative, condensed timeline and document sources to help Senators and Members of the House of Representatives understand where this scandal came from, what the evidentiary sources are and what legislative remedies may be taken to fully develop the truth, help target oversight and to prevent such a tragedy from happening again.  It has been written with input derived from the whistleblowers themselves.

Background, Narrative and Condensed Timeline

For many months throughout 2010, the ATF’s “Project Gunrunner” initiative was under fire for poor management, exaggerated statistics, etc. The agency was floundering to carry out an agenda that wasn’t entirely covered by the law and its managers were stung by poor publicity and especially by an Inspector General’s report which Michael Isikoff first reported leaks on last September 21, presaging the official report which was finally made public in November.  Isikoff’s story said in part:

“A major Justice Department program aimed at intercepting the flow of U.S. weapons to Mexico’s drug cartels is misfiring due to bureaucratic turf battles and a failure to share critical intelligence about illegal firearms purchases, according to an internal department report.”

The IG report excoriated ATF’s Project Gunrunner performance.  It is now alleged by ATF’s own agents that sometime in late 2009 or early 2010, the Phoenix office of ATF began to implement a policy of “walking” semi-automatic rifles south of the border — at first with a wink and a nod, later, according to one agent:

“The agency was not only looking the other way but actually facilitating trafficking, threatening and punishing agents who voiced objections, covering up trace information, the truth about the gun that killed BPA Terry, what I.C.E. knew, it goes on and on.”

“Walking” is a time tested way of making a case against a known criminal figure.  For example, let’s say that Evil Bad Guy “B” is known to have provided contraband to Criminal Enterprise “C.”  Law enforcement then uses a confidential informant or perhaps just a petty criminal known to them and arranges that they convey the contraband from Point “A” to Evil Bad Guy “B,” who then transports it to “C.”  “Walking” involves the surveillance by law enforcement of the contraband from “A” all the way through to “C” — either by eyes on or electronics — thus establishing a chain of custody and when it arrives, the agents swoop down and roll up the entire ring.  The agents literally “walk” the contraband from “A” to “C.”

In these cases, however, the end destination — the Point “C” — was across the border into Mexico, where ATF cannot normally go, and certainly not without the assistance of Mexican law enforcement.

During this time, it is alleged by an experienced ATF street agent, the ATF deliberately did not inform the Mexican authorities that this was going on:

“Darren Gil, former attaché to Mexico is an honest and honorable guy. He was forcefully removed from Mexico without warning in November in large part because he wouldn’t sit silent on these matters. He will tell the truth if asked by competent authority. He retired Dec 31 because of all this.”

Also during this time, gun stores along the border were calling ATF and reporting multiple sales, only to be told to allow the sales to go through, and in some cases, follow the purchasers out into the parking lot to get license numbers.   There are firearms dealers who are willing to come forward and detail their similar experiences to the Congress if asked under oath.  They are reluctant to do so without Congressional protection because their livelihoods are at the mercy of ATF regulators, who are known to conduct hostile “inspections” designed to characterize the dealer as a criminal or danger to the community.

All of this, it is alleged, was done in order to boost the numbers of seized semi-automatic “assault weapons” in Mexico to justify continued, or expanded, Project Gunrunner funding.

With the death of Agent Terry, the private resistance of the street agents of the ATF in the Phoenix office and elsewhere broke out into the open.  An unknown but significant number of ATF agents with personal knowledge and documents of this scandal became willing to tell their story to any Senator who asked them.  The first mention of these rumors in a public venue came out in postings by disaffected ATF street agents writing comments at their own website,  The story broke on December 28, 2010.

Over the next month, Senator Grassley’s office contacted these agents who were willing to speak out, not the other way around as has been reported.

The contacts with the whistleblowers led to Senator Grassley’s first letter to ATF Acting Director Kenneth Melson on January 27, 2011, laying out the whistleblower‘s allegation and requesting information.

“On Tuesday, according to press reports, the ATF arrested 17 suspects in a Project Gunrunner bust.  William Newell, the Special Agent in Charge of the ATF’s Phoenix Field Office was quoted as saying, ‘We strongly believe we took down the entire organization from top to bottom that operated out of the Phoenix area.’  However, if the 17 individuals were merely straw purchasers of whom the ATF had been previously aware before Agent Terry’s death, then that raises a host of serious questions that the ATF needs to address immediately.”

On January 31, 2011, pursuant to reports that the Phoenix ATF management was threatening reprisals against agents who talked about the Terry case, Senator Grassley sent another letter to Acting Director Melson, reminding him strongly of the whistleblower protection laws and that the Congress would decline to appropriate money to pay the salaries of any federal employees who tried to so retaliate.

On February 4, Assistant Attorney General Ronald Weich sent a reply to Senator Grassley which was both preemptory and insulting to his character.  On February 7, an ATF agent writing on proposed a witness list and questions for Senator Grassley.

In retrospect, the Justice Department surely considered the February 4 letter ill-advised, because on February 9 Senator Grassley fired back a blistering three-page salvo directly to Attorney General Holder with attached documents he obviously obtained from whistleblowers that strongly supported their allegations.  Senator Grassley concluded this letter:

“The Terry family deserves answers. The whistleblowers have expressed a desire to honor Agent Terry’s memory by disclosing this information. The Justice Department should work to do the same. The best way to honor his memory is to come clean.”

The Senator in his letter again suggested a meeting with ATF.  That meeting happened on February 10, and according to an internal ATF source, the briefing was done by James E. McDermond, Assistant Director of ATF’s Office of Strategic Intelligence and Information.  McDermond was quoted as saying he thought the meeting went well.

On February 16, Senator Grassley disabused the ATF, the FBI, Customs and Border Patrol and the Department of Justice of that optimistic notion with a detailed, two-page demand to AG Eric Holder for specific documents in the “Project Gunwalker” Scandal.

It has been over two months since Agent Terry’s death and the complete outline of this scandal has yet to be discovered.  What we do not know, and what should be a priority of legislative inquiry, is what happened to the rest of the alleged three thousand “walked” firearms?  The ATF whistleblowers have said that there already have been other casualties, including the deaths of Mexican government officials and citizens, who have been identified.  The ATF should be compelled by the Congress to disclose who they are so that we may know the entire scope of this scandal, and determine how to help prevent such flawed law enforcement operations in future.

Government Accountability Office (GAO)

The relevant committee(s) taking up the inquiry into the “Project Gunwalker” scandal need to request two reports, one from GAO, the other from CRS.  The GAO report request should ask for a report on the firearms tracing system; how firearms trace data are collected, indexed, called up/retrieved, reported, what the data represent, how the data can be used, the extent (if any) to which ATF has validated the data, and how ATF has been using or misusing the data.  Of course the GAO (like CRS) is not an investigative agency per se but rather does program audits and evaluations, to explain how a program and/or policy is working or not.  An objective evaluation of the ATF’s firearms tracing system would be relevant to this case, and provide legislative guidance for any changes in the system that may be advisable.

Congressional Research Service (CRS)

The Congress routinely relies upon CRS reports to obtain legislative and policy information, and to prepare materials in support of Congressional hearings.   CRS previously did a report entitled “Gun Trafficking and the Southwest Border” by Vivian S. Chu, CRS Legislative Attorney and William J. Krouse, dated July 29, 2009.

Importantly, in November of last year the U.S. Department of Justice Office of the Inspector General Evaluation and Inspections Division released a report titled “Review of ATF’s Project Gunrunner, Evaluation and Inspections Report I-2011-001, November 2010,” which was extremely critical of ATF’s performance.

The November 2010 report determined:

“ATF has not provided Mexican law enforcement with intelligence it requested on firearms trafficking patterns and trends, including trafficking routes and distribution points where guns are crossing into Mexico.”

This, of course, is one of the most important allegations of the ATF whistleblowers.

The Congress should request CRS to update the July 29, 2009 report on Project Gunrunner, which include (1) the major criticisms of Project Gunrunner identified by the Department of Justice Inspector General, as well as the appropriateness of remedies suggested in that report to address shortcomings in Project Gunrunner, and (2) an analysis of the legislative issues which are suggested by Project Gunrunner, such as tracking the multiple sales of rifles by federally licensed firearms dealers.

Both of these Congressional agencies have a history of providing helpful information in response to Congressional inquiries.  Even so, investigative hearings of the immediate “Project Gunwalker” allegations should not be postponed waiting on these GAO and CRS reports.

Immediate Investigative Hearings

There is a pressing public need to know what actually happened with Project Gunrunner and the circumstances which led to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.  It may be concluded from Senator Grassley’s letters that they are well-informed by documents and informal testimony from whistleblower witnesses within the agency.  The only way that the public can be informed as to the truth is for these agency whistleblowers, other witnesses such as cooperating gun store owners, the accused senior managers and other such persons having knowledge to be called before the Congress and questioned under oath.

The ATF agent’s list above is a good start, but the following persons may also be profitably questioned to develop a complete understanding of what went wrong with Project Gunrunner, what decisions were taken after the murder of Brian Terry, and what the effects have been of the “walked” firearms on the Mexican side of the border:

* Adam R. Price and Jeffrey B. Stirling, program managers for Gunrunner at ATF headquarters.

* Lanny Breuer, Assistant Attorney General of the DOJ Criminal Investigations Division.

* Eric Holder, Attorney General of the United States

* Robert Mueller, Director of the FBI

* Hillary Clinton, Secretary of State

* Janet Napolitano, Department of Homeland Security


ATF Oversight Hearings

“We got to figure out a way between you and me. We got to figure out a better way so that we don’t take this argument to the Internet or all over the place. . . to Senators and Congressmen, who don’t know anything about what we are talking about.”Sterling Nixon, Chief of Firearms Technology Branch, ATF,  to firearms designer and manufacturer Len Savage, Historic Arms, LLC, Franklin, GA, transcript of taped telephone call, on file with DOJ Office of Professional Responsibility.

For a later date in this Congress, there are several subjects raised by the scandal that should be explored by both the Senate and the House in their oversight capacity.

The ATF has not had truly serious, critical oversight hearings since 1982.  This unaccountability throughout administrations of both parties has led to an arrogance that permeates management at all levels, according to the whistleblowers.   They allege that this scandal could have been averted entirely if the ATF senior executive service was not riddled with cronyism, toleration of incompetence, lack of accountability, lack of transparency, failure to adhere to written policies, retaliation against agents trying to do the right thing, and so on.

In addition, both the street agents and outside observers identify the Chief Counsel’s Office as the center of many of the agency’s problems.  The CCO has used its considerable powers to retaliate against dissident agents and citizen critics alike.  It has, according to the agents, misused the EEOC enforcement process against what the CCO views as “malcontents.”  Outside the agency, the CCO is alleged (with considerable evidence) to have pursued “economic Wacos” (an internal ATF term) against those within the ATF’s regulatory power such as FFL holders, firearm designers, etc., who anger someone in the agency.

Inter-Agency and Foreign Relations Implications

Hearings exploring the diplomatic implications of American federal law enforcement agency misconduct as exemplified by “Project Gunwalker” and how the various agencies interact to help or harm the safety of citizens of both countries on each side of the border could become a stepping stone to fix some of those problems.  Gunwalker brings into prominence the problems when one agency decides to make its own foreign policy, independent of and contrary to, the will of the Senate, the House and the people.

The extent to which the ATF and DOJ executives in the Gunwalker scandal broke American and Mexican laws — as well as diplomatic accords and even treaties by unilaterally deciding to abrogate them — could provide guidance for stronger laws, better training, and for effective inter-agency and international communication.


The members of Gun Owners of America — and the whistleblowers who first risked all to get the story of this scandal out — believe that there is a pressing public need to know what actually happened with Project Gunrunner and the circumstances which led to the death of Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry.  We believe that there should be immediate investigative hearings in both Senate and House followed by oversight hearings to shine a bright light on the endemic problems of the ATF which led to this scandal.

However, since Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid is likely to assist in the cover-up, rather than embarrass Attorney General Eric Holder, we believe that hearings should begin in the U.S. House of Representatives.

We also believe with Senator Grassley that the best way to honor Brian Terry’s memory is for the ATF and the Department of Justice “to come clean.”  We believe that this will only happen when all the parties involved are put under oath in a hearing room on Capitol Hill.


Important Source Documents for “Project Gunwalker”

David Codrea’s Comprehensive Guide to “Project Gunwalker”

Can be found here:


Michael Isikoff’s story of 21 September 2010 can be found here:

The November 2010 U.S. Department of Justice Office of Inspector General report, “Review of ATF’s Project Gunrunner” which excoriates ATF performance can be found here:

Sources of Mexican crime trace weapons and the “90 Percent Myth”

Mexico’s Gun Supply and the 90 Percent Myth  by Scott Stewart, Stratfor Intelligence Report,

Wikileaks cables on military ordnance in cartel hands in Mexico:

Carter’s Country as example of ATF requests to gun dealers:

The 12 December Washington Post article is here:

The 13 December Post follow-up with some of Deguerin’s remarks is here:

Also on 13 December the local Houston FOX affiliate ran video with more Deguerin quotes:

Fast and Furious Indictments referred to in the Open Source Analysis

US v. Avila et al.:

US v. Flores et al.:

US v. Broome et al.:

US v. Aguilar:

US v. Abarca

Map of Firearms Recovered in Avilas Investigation

Grassley/ATF/DOJ Letters:

27 December, Grassley to Melson:
31 December, Grassley to Melson:
4 February, Weich to Grassley:
9 February, Grassley to Holder:
16 February, Grassley to Holder,



Déjà Vu, All Over Again: “More Guns, Less Crime”

September 19, 2010

Paul Helmke and Dennis Henigan — spokesmen for the beleaguered Brady Campaign these days — are old enough to know what a phonograph record is, so for their benefit we’ll put it this way:  At the risk of sounding like a “broken record,” gun ownership has risen to an all-time high, and violent crime has fallen to a 35-year low.  Coinciding with a surge in gun purchases that began shortly before the 2008 elections, violent crime decreased six percent between 2008 and 2009, according to the FBI. This included an eight percent decrease in murder and a nine percent decrease in robbery.

Since 1991, when total violent crime peaked, it has decreased 43 percent to a 35-year low. The murder rate, less than half what it was in 1980, is now at a 45-year low. Throughout, the number of guns that Americans own has risen by about four million a year, including record numbers of the two types of firearms that the Brady folks would most like to see banned — handguns and the various firearms they call “assault weapons.”

Predictions that increasing the number of guns would cause crime to increase have been proven profoundly lacking in clairvoyance. One of our favorite gems comes from the Brady outfit, when it was known as the National Council to Control Handguns: “There are now 40 million handguns. . . . the number could build to 100 million. . . . the consequences can be terrible to imagine,” the group warned in the mid-1970s.

“Terrible consequences” indeed, for gun control supporters. The number of handguns has reached almost 100 million; waiting periods, purchase permits, and prohibitions on carrying firearms for protection have been dismantled in state after state; gun ownership has soared; and violent crime has plummeted.


Related, same source;

Speaking of Brady Campaign’s Paul Helmke and Dennis Henigan, we wouldn’t want them losing their grip and falling off the far left edge of the planet.  An electronic search reveals that the two of them have submitted over 200 essays to the leftist website since January of 2006.

“It is time for progressives to stand up to the radical right,” Henigan proclaims in a recent item.   “It is time for progressives to stand up to the right’s misappropriation of our Constitution and to claim for themselves the label of ‘constitutionalists.’  After all, proponents of a stronger federal government were the winners of the Founding-era debate.  The radical right of the modern era can trace its lineage only to the losers.”

Henigan may be confused about American history, since no one of his political orientation traces his lineage back to anyone associated with the founding of this country.  But when it comes to losers, Henigan ought to know better than most.  In District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court put his two theories about the Second Amendment–that it protected a right of a state to have a militia, or that it protected a right of a person to be armed in a state militia–in the “recycling bin” and clicked on “empty.”

More Guns Less Crime: It was true before, and it is still true

December 26, 2009

The sales boom in firearms and ammunition, largely due to the Gun Salesman of the year / Ammunition Salesman of the year, Barack H. Obama and his merry band of misfits. Has yet again caused anti liberty and freedom types to shake their heads. After all, the Brady Bunch et al would have you believe that guns are sentient things that cause crime and destruction all on their own via some mystical power over people.

Yet, the FBI says otherwise: Full story here

In the First Half of 2009

Chart showing declining crime rates in preliminary report of first half of 2009
– View the Preliminary Crime Statistics

For the third year in a row, our Preliminary Semiannual Uniform Crime Report shows that violent crime, property crime, and arson have decreased. The latest report compares January-June 2009 figures with the same time period in 2008.

Crimes reported to our Uniform Crime Program are down collectively: violent crime overall decreased 4.4 percent, property crime is down 6.1 percent, and arson fell 8.2 percent.


Individual crimes are also decreasing across the board:

Other interesting highlights:

  • Murder was lower in all four regions of the country, with the largest decreases in the Northeast (13.7 percent) and the West (13.3 percent).
  • Motor vehicle thefts decreased significantly in all four regions of the country (Northeast, 19.3 percent; Midwest, 21.4 percent; South, 17.8 percent; and West, 18.2 percent).
  • While violent crime and aggravated assault were down in cities of more than 1 million people (7.0 percent and 6.2 percent, respectively), in cities of populations between 10,000 and 24,999, violent crime rose 1.7 percent and aggravated assault rose 3.8 percent.
  • While both metropolitan areas and non-metropolitan areas experienced decreases in violent crime and property crime in general, non-metropolitan counties saw increases in robbery (3.8 percent) and arson (1.2 percent).
  • On a regional basis, the only uptick in any crime was a slight increase in burglaries in the South (up 0.7 percent)

Federal gun regulator accused of damaging Metairie hotel room

December 15, 2009

Hat Tip to Texas Fred for the heads up on this. Regular readers know that I support LEO’s to the hilt. But, there always has to be an exception to make the rule or so the saying goes.

That exception, is the BATFE. The only agency dedicated to the destruction of The Bill of Rights. During the Clinton years Explosives were added to the responsibilities of the notoriously rogue agency. One can only guess that Clinton did that in order to lend an air of legitimacy to the group of maniacs that brought you the Ruby Ridge travesty and the Waco Holocaust.

I am on record as having stated that any thing that is legitimate that they do, should, on a federal level be performed by the FBI. No, the FBI isn’t perfect, but compared to BATFE? The FBI wins hands down when it comes to acting ethically.

Moving BATFE from the IRS to DHS hasn’t changed much…

Read about this HERE

Registration, then confiscation, then what? Ovens?

October 24, 2009

I was sent this from a colleague. I was like, guess what? I’ve been bitching about this for years. So now it’s a big deal? Why the sudden interest is my question. The B.A.T.F.E. is a rogue agency period. Some legitimacy, applied as lipstick on a pig was bestowed on them during the Clinton years by adding Explosives enforcement and investigation to their duties. To an agency that, at that time, was under the control of the IRS? What the hell? Isn’t the F.B.I. capable of enforcing Federal laws? All the lipstick that the History Channel has been applying to this out of control group as of late still will not cleanse the sins of the past committed by them in the name of unbridled power and control.

Still, I suppose better late than never as the saying goes. J.F.P.O. has been on top of this since at least 1994.

Read about this blatant abuse of power and disregard for the rule of law HERE.

Before it was patriotic to dissent

April 13, 2009

Before the recent election it was considered patriotic to engage in dissent. However, since the election that has changed apparently. Indeed, it appears that most, if not all citizens that are not completely in line with the current administration are being squarely placed within the sights of government enforcers. What follows is a recently unclassified document. It is, at minimum disturbing. Dissent and freedom of speech are fine, at least so long as you are into boot licking…

(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism:
Current Economic and Political
Climate Fueling Resurgence in
Radicalization and Recruitment
(U) LAW ENFORCEMENT INFORMATION NOTICE: This product contains Law Enforcement Sensitive (LES) information. No portion of the LES information
should be released to the media, the general public, or over non-secure Internet servers. Release of this information could adversely affect or jeopardize
investigative activities.
(U) Warning: This document is UNCLASSIFIED//FOR OFFICIAL USE ONLY (U//FOUO). It contains information that may be exempt from public release under the
Freedom of Information Act (5 U.S.C. 552). It is to be controlled, stored, handled, transmitted, distributed, and disposed of in accordance with DHS policy relating to
FOUO information and is not to be released to the public, the media, or other personnel who do not have a valid need-to-know without prior approval of an authorized
DHS official. State and local homeland security officials may share this document with authorized security personnel without further approval from DHS.
(U) All U.S. person information has been minimized. Should you require the minimized U.S. person information, please contact the DHS/I&A Production Branch at,, or
(U//FOUO) Rightwing Extremism: Current
Economic and Political Climate Fueling
Resurgence in Radicalization and Recruitment
7 April 2009
(U) Prepared by the Extremism and Radicalization Branch, Homeland Environment Threat Analysis
Division. Coordinated with the FBI.
(U) Scope
(U//FOUO) This product is one of a series of intelligence assessments published by the
Extremism and Radicalization Branch to facilitate a greater understanding of the
phenomenon of violent radicalization in the United States. The information is
provided to federal, state, local, and tribal counterterrorism and law enforcement
officials so they may effectively deter, prevent, preempt, or respond to terrorist attacks
against the United States. Federal efforts to influence domestic public opinion must be
conducted in an overt and transparent manner, clearly identifying United States
Government sponsorship.
Page 2 of 9
(U) Key Findings
(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific
information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence,
but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about
several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first
African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and
— (U//LES) Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups
during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry
out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic
downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability
to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing
extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and
government authorities similar to those in the past.
— (U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first
African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new
members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal
through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.
(U//FOUO) The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the
1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an
economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to
U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.
— (U//FOUO) During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the
number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in
violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks,
and infrastructure sectors.
— (U//FOUO) Growth of these groups subsided in reaction to increased
government scrutiny as a result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and
disrupted plots, improvements in the economy, and the continued U.S. standing
as the preeminent world power.
(U//FOUO) The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of
military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities
could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists
capable of carrying out violent attacks.
* (U) Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and
adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups),
and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or
rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a
single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
Page 3 of 9
— (U//FOUO) Proposed imposition of firearms restrictions and weapons bans
likely would attract new members into the ranks of rightwing extremist groups,
as well as potentially spur some of them to begin planning and training for
violence against the government. The high volume of purchases and
stockpiling of weapons and ammunition by rightwing extremists in anticipation
of restrictions and bans in some parts of the country continue to be a primary
concern to law enforcement.
— (U//FOUO) Returning veterans possess combat skills and experience that are
attractive to rightwing extremists. DHS/I&A is concerned that rightwing
extremists will attempt to recruit and radicalize returning veterans in order to
boost their violent capabilities.
(U) Current Economic and Political Climate
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that a number of economic and political factors are
driving a resurgence in rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization activity.
Despite similarities to the climate of the 1990s, the threat posed by lone wolves and small
terrorist cells is more pronounced than in past years. In addition, the historical election of
an African American president and the prospect of policy changes are proving to be a
driving force for rightwing extremist recruitment and radicalization.
— (U) A recent example of the potential violence associated with a rise in rightwing
extremism may be found in the shooting deaths of three police officers in
Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, on 4 April 2009. The alleged gunman’s reaction
reportedly was influenced by his racist ideology and belief in antigovernment
conspiracy theories related to gun confiscations, citizen detention camps, and a
Jewish-controlled “one world government.”
(U) Exploiting Economic Downturn
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist chatter on the Internet continues to focus on the
economy, the perceived loss of U.S. jobs in the manufacturing and construction sectors,
and home foreclosures. Anti-Semitic extremists attribute these losses to a deliberate
conspiracy conducted by a cabal of Jewish “financial elites.” These “accusatory” tactics
are employed to draw new recruits into rightwing extremist groups and further radicalize
those already subscribing to extremist beliefs. DHS/I&A assesses this trend is likely to
accelerate if the economy is perceived to worsen.
(U) Historical Presidential Election
(U//LES) Rightwing extremists are harnessing this historical election as a recruitment
tool. Many rightwing extremists are antagonistic toward the new presidential
administration and its perceived stance on a range of issues, including immigration and
citizenship, the expansion of social programs to minorities, and restrictions on firearms
Page 4 of 9
(U//FOUO) Perceptions on Poverty and Radicalization
(U//FOUO) Scholars and experts disagree over poverty’s role in motivating violent radicalization or
terrorist activity. High unemployment, however, has the potential to lead to alienation, thus increasing
an individual’s susceptibility to extremist ideas. According to a 2007 study from the German Institute
for Economic Research, there appears to be a strong association between a parent’s unemployment
status and the formation of rightwing extremist beliefs in their children—specifically xenophobia and
antidemocratic ideals.
ownership and use. Rightwing extremists are increasingly galvanized by these concerns
and leverage them as drivers for recruitment. From the 2008 election timeframe to the
present, rightwing extremists have capitalized on related racial and political prejudices in
expanded propaganda campaigns, thereby reaching out to a wider audience of potential
— (U//LES) Most statements by rightwing extremists have been rhetorical,
expressing concerns about the election of the first African American president,
but stopping short of calls for violent action. In two instances in the run-up to the
election, extremists appeared to be in the early planning stages of some
threatening activity targeting the Democratic nominee, but law enforcement
(U) Revisiting the 1990s
(U//FOUO) Paralleling the current national climate, rightwing extremists during the
1990s exploited a variety of social issues and political themes to increase group visibility
and recruit new members. Prominent among these themes were the militia movement’s
opposition to gun control efforts, criticism of free trade agreements (particularly those
with Mexico), and highlighting perceived government infringement on civil liberties as
well as white supremacists’ longstanding exploitation of social issues such as abortion,
inter-racial crimes, and same-sex marriage. During the 1990s, these issues contributed to
the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an
increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks,
and infrastructure sectors.
(U) Economic Hardship and Extremism
(U//FOUO) Historically, domestic rightwing extremists have feared, predicted, and
anticipated a cataclysmic economic collapse in the United States. Prominent
antigovernment conspiracy theorists have incorporated aspects of an impending
economic collapse to intensify fear and paranoia among like-minded individuals and to
attract recruits during times of economic uncertainty. Conspiracy theories involving
declarations of martial law, impending civil strife or racial conflict, suspension of the
U.S. Constitution, and the creation of citizen detention camps often incorporate aspects of
a failed economy. Antigovernment conspiracy theories and “end times” prophecies could
motivate extremist individuals and groups to stockpile food, ammunition, and weapons.
These teachings also have been linked with the radicalization of domestic extremist
individuals and groups in the past, such as violent Christian Identity organizations and
extremist members of the militia movement.
Page 5 of 9
(U) Illegal Immigration
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremists were concerned during the 1990s with the perception
that illegal immigrants were taking away American jobs through their willingness to
work at significantly lower wages. They also opposed free trade agreements, arguing that
these arrangements resulted in Americans losing jobs to countries such as Mexico.
(U//FOUO) Over the past five years, various rightwing extremists, including militias and
white supremacists, have adopted the immigration issue as a call to action, rallying point,
and recruiting tool. Debates over appropriate immigration levels and enforcement policy
generally fall within the realm of protected political speech under the First Amendment,
but in some cases, anti-immigration or strident pro-enforcement fervor has been directed
against specific groups and has the potential to turn violent.
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremist groups’ frustration over a
perceived lack of government action on illegal immigration has the potential to incite
individuals or small groups toward violence. If such violence were to occur, it likely
would be isolated, small-scale, and directed at specific immigration-related targets.
— (U//FOUO) DHS/I&A notes that prominent civil rights organizations have
observed an increase in anti-Hispanic crimes over the past five years.
— (U) In April 2007, six militia members were arrested for various weapons and
explosives violations. Open source reporting alleged that those arrested had
discussed and conducted surveillance for a machinegun attack on Hispanics.
— (U) A militia member in Wyoming was arrested in February 2007 after
communicating his plans to travel to the Mexican border to kill immigrants
crossing into the United States.
(U) Legislative and Judicial Drivers
(U//FOUO) Many rightwing extremist groups perceive recent gun control legislation as a
threat to their right to bear arms and in response have increased weapons and ammunition
stockpiling, as well as renewed participation in paramilitary training exercises. Such
activity, combined with a heightened level of extremist paranoia, has the potential to
facilitate criminal activity and violence.
— (U//FOUO) During the 1990s, rightwing extremist hostility toward government
was fueled by the implementation of restrictive gun laws—such as the Brady Law
that established a 5-day waiting period prior to purchasing a handgun and the
1994 Violent Crime Control and Law Enforcement Act that limited the sale of
various types of assault rifles—and federal law enforcement’s handling of the
confrontations at Waco, Texas and Ruby Ridge, Idaho.
Page 6 of 9
— (U//FOUO) On the current front, legislation has been proposed this year
requiring mandatory registration of all firearms in the United States. Similar
legislation was introduced in 2008 in several states proposing mandatory tagging
and registration of ammunition. It is unclear if either bill will be passed into law;
nonetheless, a correlation may exist between the potential passage of gun control
legislation and increased hoarding of ammunition, weapons stockpiling, and
paramilitary training activities among rightwing extremists.
(U//FOUO) Open source reporting of wartime ammunition shortages has likely spurred
rightwing extremists—as well as law-abiding Americans—to make bulk purchases of
ammunition. These shortages have increased the cost of ammunition, further
exacerbating rightwing extremist paranoia and leading to further stockpiling activity.
Both rightwing extremists and law-abiding citizens share a belief that rising crime rates
attributed to a slumping economy make the purchase of legitimate firearms a wise move
at this time.
(U//FOUO) Weapons rights and gun-control legislation are likely to be hotly contested
subjects of political debate in light of the 2008 Supreme Court’s decision in District of
Columbia v. Heller in which the Court reaffirmed an individual’s right to keep and bear
arms under the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, but left open to debate the
precise contours of that right. Because debates over constitutional rights are intense, and
parties on all sides have deeply held, sincere, but vastly divergent beliefs, violent
extremists may attempt to co-opt the debate and use the controversy as a radicalization
(U) Perceived Threat from Rise of Other Countries
(U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist paranoia of foreign regimes could escalate or be
magnified in the event of an economic crisis or military confrontation, harkening back to
the “New World Order” conspiracy theories of the 1990s. The dissolution of Communist
countries in Eastern Europe and the end of the Soviet Union in the 1990s led some
rightwing extremists to believe that a “New World Order” would bring about a world
government that would usurp the sovereignty of the United States and its Constitution,
thus infringing upon their liberty. The dynamics in 2009 are somewhat similar, as other
countries, including China, India, and Russia, as well as some smaller, oil-producing
states, are experiencing a rise in economic power and influence.
— (U//FOUO) Fear of Communist regimes and related conspiracy theories
characterizing the U.S. Government’s role as either complicit in a foreign
invasion or acquiescing as part of a “One World Government” plan inspired
extremist members of the militia movement to target government and military
facilities in past years.
— (U//FOUO) Law enforcement in 1996 arrested three rightwing militia members
in Battle Creek, Michigan with pipe bombs, automatic weapons, and military
Page 7 of 9
(U//FOUO) Lone Wolves and Small Terrorist Cells
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that lone wolves and small terrorist cells embracing violent rightwing
extremist ideology are the most dangerous domestic terrorism threat in the United States. Information
from law enforcement and nongovernmental organizations indicates lone wolves and small terrorist
cells have shown intent—and, in some cases, the capability—to commit violent acts.
— (U//LES) DHS/I&A has concluded that white supremacist lone wolves pose the most
significant domestic terrorist threat because of their low profile and autonomy—separate from
any formalized group—which hampers warning efforts.
— (U//FOUO) Similarly, recent state and municipal law enforcement reporting has warned of the
dangers of rightwing extremists embracing the tactics of “leaderless resistance” and of lone
wolves carrying out acts of violence.
— (U//FOUO) Arrests in the past several years of radical militia members in Alabama, Arkansas,
and Pennsylvania on firearms, explosives, and other related violations indicates the emergence
of small, well-armed extremist groups in some rural areas.
ordnance that they planned to use in attacks on nearby military and federal
facilities and infrastructure targets.
— (U//FOUO) Rightwing extremist views bemoan the decline of U.S. stature and
have recently focused on themes such as the loss of U.S. manufacturing capability
to China and India, Russia’s control of energy resources and use of these to
pressure other countries, and China’s investment in U.S. real estate and
corporations as a part of subversion strategy.
(U) Disgruntled Military Veterans
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that rightwing extremists will attempt to recruit and
radicalize returning veterans in order to exploit their skills and knowledge derived from
military training and combat. These skills and knowledge have the potential to boost the
capabilities of extremists—including lone wolves or small terrorist cells—to carry out
violence. The willingness of a small percentage of military personnel to join extremist
groups during the 1990s because they were disgruntled, disillusioned, or suffering from
the psychological effects of war is being replicated today.
— (U) After Operation Desert Shield/Storm in 1990-1991, some returning military
veterans—including Timothy McVeigh—joined or associated with rightwing
extremist groups.
— (U) A prominent civil rights organization reported in 2006 that “large numbers
of potentially violent neo-Nazis, skinheads, and other white supremacists are now
learning the art of warfare in the [U.S.] armed forces.”
— (U//LES) The FBI noted in a 2008 report on the white supremacist movement
that some returning military veterans from the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have
joined extremist groups.
Page 8 of 9
(U) Outlook
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A assesses that the combination of environmental factors that echo
the 1990s, including heightened interest in legislation for tighter firearms restrictions and
returning military veterans, as well as several new trends, including an uncertain
economy and a perceived rising influence of other countries, may be invigorating
rightwing extremist activity, specifically the white supremacist and militia movements.
To the extent that these factors persist, rightwing extremism is likely to grow in strength.
(U//FOUO) Unlike the earlier period, the advent of the Internet and other informationage
technologies since the 1990s has given domestic extremists greater access to
information related to bomb-making, weapons training, and tactics, as well as targeting of
individuals, organizations, and facilities, potentially making extremist individuals and
groups more dangerous and the consequences of their violence more severe. New
technologies also permit domestic extremists to send and receive encrypted
communications and to network with other extremists throughout the country and abroad,
making it much more difficult for law enforcement to deter, prevent, or preempt a violent
extremist attack.
(U//FOUO) A number of law enforcement actions and external factors were effective in
limiting the militia movement during the 1990s and could be utilized in today’s climate.
— (U//FOUO) Following the 1995 bombing of the Alfred P. Murrah federal
building in Oklahoma City, the militia movement declined in total membership
and in the number of organized groups because many members distanced
themselves from the movement as a result of the intense scrutiny militias received
after the bombing.
— (U//FOUO) Militia membership continued to decline after the turn of the
millennium as a result of law enforcement disruptions of multiple terrorist plots
linked to violent rightwing extremists, new legislation banning paramilitary
training, and militia frustration that the “revolution” never materialized.
— (U//FOUO) Although the U.S. economy experienced a significant recovery and
many perceived a concomitant rise in U.S. standing in the world, white
supremacist groups continued to experience slight growth.
(U//FOUO) DHS/I&A will be working with its state and local partners over the next
several months to ascertain with greater regional specificity the rise in rightwing
extremist activity in the United States, with a particular emphasis on the political,
economic, and social factors that drive rightwing extremist radicalization.
Page 9 of 9
(U) Reporting Notice:
(U) DHS encourages recipients of this document to report information concerning suspicious or criminal
activity to DHS and the FBI. The DHS National Operations Center (NOC) can be reached by telephone at
202-282-9685 or by e-mail at For information affecting the private sector and
critical infrastructure, contact the National Infrastructure Coordinating Center (NICC), a sub-element of the
NOC. The NICC can be reached by telephone at 202-282-9201 or by e-mail at The FBI
regional phone numbers can be found online at When available,
each report submitted should include the date, time, location, type of activity, number of people and type of
equipment used for the activity, the name of the submitting company or organization, and a designated
point of contact.
(U) For comments or questions related to the content or dissemination of this document, please contact the
DHS/I&A Production Branch at,, or
(U) Tracked by: CRIM-040300-01-05, CRIM-040400-01-05, TERR-010000-01-05


Readability is a lot better using the link. This is dangerous beyond belief.

2nd Amendment: Crime is down, some call for more gun control

February 14, 2009

The FBI has recently released 2008 statistics showing that violent crime in the United States has dropped to a 35-year low, with the murder rate at its lowest in 43 years. In fact, since peaking in 1991, the rates of murder and violent crime as a whole have fallen 41 percent and 46 percent respectively. But despite this positive news, the anti-gun Brady Campaign is continuing to wage war on our Second Amendment right to bear arms.

The Campaign is claiming, “Most states have weak or non-existent gun laws that help feed the illegal gun market, allow the sale of guns without Brady background checks and put families and children at risk.” This statement flies in the face of the cold, hard fact that violent crime stats have fallen during a time when laws restricting the purchase of firearms have become less stringent.

Manipulating data is nothing new to the Brady Campaign. Each year the group issues a scorecard for each state, on which the state scores anywhere from zero to 100. The more gun control laws it has on the books, the higher the score. The problem is, they don’t bother to check whether the laws are having any effect on crime. In truth, it’s more guns, less crime.


%d bloggers like this: