Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry; “Phony Scandals” and the Second Amendment
Brian A. Terry grew up in Michigan and served in the US Marine Corps. He also served as a Lincoln Park police officer, as well as an Ecorse police officer. He joined the US Border Patrol on July 23rd 2007, with class 699.
On December 14, 2010, in a remote area of the Arizona desert known as Peck Canyon, members of the Border Patrol’s elite tactical unit known as BORTAC were on the lookout for illegal alien drug smugglers. Before too long, the agents come across a group of five drug smugglers. Armed with less-than-lethal beanbag shotguns, the agents made their presence known. They end up firing beanbag rounds at the suspects, who in turn returned fire with their real guns. The agents then engage in a full blown firefight with their service issued weapons. Before the gun smoke had settled, Agent Brian A. Terry was found to have been shot in the back by an AK-47. He died shortly thereafter. Two of the suspects’ weapons were found at the scene, which happened to be AK-47s.
Attorney General Eric Holder was notified immediately via email about the incident. Within hours, Department of Justice officials realized that the weapons found at the scene were linked to Operation Fast and Furious
and began their coverup. Operation Fast and Furious was a botched program that directed American gun stores to sell weapons to DOJ informants that were involved with Mexican drug cartels. The weapons, which were paid for with US tax dollars, were supposed to be tracked into Mexico and into the hands of cartel leaders. Except for one thing: the DOJ lost track of thousands of the guns, including Barrett .50 caliber sniper rifles, AK-47s, FN Five-sevens (aka “cop killer”), and others.
Only a fraction of the guns have been recovered to date. As of today, they are still being used along the border to commit more crimes. ICE Agent Jaime Zapata was also killed by a gun that some suspect came from Fast & Furious. In addition, hundreds of Mexican citizens have also been killed with Fast & Furious linked weapons.
Most Americans know this story by now because ATF Agent John Dodson blew the whistle. After not receiving a response from his agency leaders, he went to Congressman Darrell Issa to bring Fast & Furious to light. What Americans
have been lied to about don’t know, is the real story behind Fast & Furious. I too do not know the truth behind it with certainty. I do however have some speculation about what happened.
Many involved with US/Mexican relations have strong opinions about the drug and weapons trade between the two countries. Some suggest that the US is to blame for Mexico’s violence and narcotics problems because Americans consume most of the drugs that come though Mexico, and some of the firearms in Mexico come from the US. It should be noted that most Mexican citizens are prohibited from
defending themselves and their families owning guns. How many guns are illegally smuggled to Mexico from America is unknown.
It is widely known that many guns used by the drug cartels originate from corrupt Mexican military and law enforcement officials. Without a doubt, some come from the US. However,
radical left-wing liberals and communists progressives in the US like to place most of the blame on the Second Amendment. It is this argument, I believe, that fueled Fast & Furious.
It is no secret that the Obama administration
views the Second Amendment as a roadblock to a fascist take over has a deep disdain for the Second Amendment. But exactly how far would he and his cronies go to push their people control gun control agenda? It is my theory that Operation Fast and Furious was supposed to be used as a way to further the cause of Obama’s dictatorship gun control. Keep in mind that Fast & Furious was supposed to be kept from the public, like most of the Obama administration’s userpations of liberty. I theorize that the Obama administration was trying to use Fast & Furious to fuel the violence in Mexico with American guns. They then would be able to create a “solution” to the problem that they created by enacting restrictive gun control. Only in the mind of progressive liberals would it be acceptable to fuel gang violence and kill people create a problem in order to furnish a solution. After all, in the words of the ghostwriter of Obama’s Dreams From My Father Obama’s hero, Saul Alinsky, the ends justify the means.
Alinsky’s book, Rules for Radicals, which was dedicated to Lucifer, acts as a type of bible for progressives/communists. In Rules for Radicals, there is even a specific “rule” regarding means and ends. Rule 2. Of Means and Ends states “The end is what you want, the means is how you get it. Whenever we think about social change, the question of means and ends arises. The man of action views the issue of means and ends in pragmatic and strategic terms. He has no other problem; he thinks only of his actual resources and the possibilities of various choices of action. He asks of ends only whether they are achievable and worth the cost; of means, only whether they will work. … The real arena is corrupt and bloody.”
When you put two and two together, it is easy to see. Fast & Furious was a textbook Alinsky tactic used by the left. The goal (or “end”) was more gun control. The “means” were Fast & Furious. Apparently, the deaths of Terry and many others were “worth the cost”. In their minds, the only mistake was that they got caught.
So next time Obama tries to dismiss his scandals as “phony”, remember Brian A. Terry. His life and death were not phony.
Rest in peace, Border Patrol Agent Brian A. Terry, a true American hero.
Update: Many Obama peddlers defend Fast & Furious by stating that it was started by George Bush. They also talk about a gun-tracing program that Bush implemented, called Operation Wide Receiver. This comparison is false. Below are the five biggest differences between Bush’s Wide Receiver and Obama’s Fast & Furious, provided by The Blaze.
“The insinuation is that Fast and Furious is somehow a continuation of the Bush-era operation. The only problem with that theory is that it’s not true.”
“(1) First and foremost, operation Wide Receiver did not result in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent or an Immigrations and Customs Enforcement (ICE) officer. Fast and Furious did. The guns that ultimately killed Border Patrol agent Brian Terry and ICE officer Jamie Zapata were traced back to straw purchasers related to Fast and Furious. Zapata’s family filed a wrongful death suit against the U.S. Justice Department last week.
Further, officials have confirmed that the guns from Fast and Furious have already killed hundreds of Mexican citizens and Holder has said on the record that they will likely kill many more. The total number of confirmed deaths so far from Wide Receiver: Zero.
(2) Second, Wide Receiver, though flawed, was more of a gun-tracing operation than a gun-walking program. Gun-tracing involves putting specific safeguards in place to track firearms, such as RFID chips perhaps with video or aerial surveillance. Gun-walking is what happened in Fast and Furious, where ATF agents sold thousands of guns without a reliable way to recover them, apparently just hoping for the best.
Some of the guns from Wide Receiver were implanted with RFID chips and were actively tracked electronically. The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) in Phoenix also implemented aerial surveillance tactics in an attempt to follow the weapons.
However, problems reportedly arose due to poorly implanted RFID chips which were forced into the guns, bending the antennas and decreasing their effectiveness. Cartels and straw purchasers also eventually came up with creative ways to shake tracking maneuvers and overhead surveillance, such as driving in loops for hours until surveillance planes had to refuel.
Those in charge of Fast and Furious took no similar steps to strengthen their chances of recovering walked guns other than recording the serial numbers before watching them disappear in the hands of Mexican drug cartels.
In fact, ATF agents involved in Fast and Furious have previously testified that they were ordered to stand down and not track the weapons even when interdiction was possible and instead “took notes” and let the guns walk across the Mexico border.
(3) Third, one must take into account the size and scope of the operations.
Speaking to members of the Senate Judiciary Committee earlier this month, Holder said that “three hundred guns” were allowed to “walk” (although note the difference between “tracing” and “walking” above) in Wide Receiver. While there is no evidence that suggests otherwise, the figure is dwarfed by the approximately 2,000 firearms that walked in Fast and Furious. Roughly 1,400 guns were lost and about 700 have been recovered in Mexico and at crime scenes like the sites of Terry and Zapata’s murders.
(4) Perhaps the most convincing piece of evidence proving the two operations are separate from each other is the fact that Wide Receiver was shut down in 2007 shortly after it was clear the program was a failure. This was before Obama was even in office and nearly two years before Fast and Furious began.
Fast and Furious wasn’t shut down until late 2010 after the deaths of hundreds of Mexicans, a border agent and an ICE officer.
(5) Finally, unlike Fast and Furious, officials involved in Wide Receiver were reportedly in close contact with Mexican authorities during the operation, though how involved Mexican officials were is not entirely known.
What is known is that Mexican authorities were kept completely in the dark during Fast and Furious, according to the Mexican ambassador to the U.S. Mexico. He announced on June 1, 2012, that Mexico would be launching its own probe into Fast and Furious.
It should be perfectly clear that both the Bush and Obama administration conducted two separate, flawed operations. One, however, was a much deadlier and larger operation.
If there is evidence of wrongdoing, or false testimony related to operation Wide Receiver, those responsible should be held accountable. But the argument that Fast and Furious is all about “politics” and should just be swept under the rug because the previous administration also carried out a similar program is irresponsible.
A contempt resolution will be considered by the full House of Representatives this week. If lawmakers decide to hold the attorney general in contempt, it will be a first in U.S. history for a sitting attorney general.”