Gun used in Garland, TX terror attack connected to Fast and Furious

*shrug* Reagan got away with Iran-Contra. Damn Democrat and RINO gun runners.
Yes, *shrug* at our government supplying terrorist organizations with weapons. OJ got away with murder, so that DEFINITELY means Ted Bundy should have as well. *liberal logic*

Also, IC was terrible too.

EDIT: Wow, I used the the same comparison chuckle did and I didn't even read his comment. Woops. Great minds I guess.
 
Last edited:
*shrug* Reagan got away with Iran-Contra. Damn Democrat and RINO gun runners.


You do realize the difference between the two, don't you?

Providing firearms to criminals unable to obtain them lawfully, to provide the support for an untrue claim, in order to create the push to further strip citizens of their rights is not just immoral, unethical and a violation of the oath of office it is illegal.

Nations providing small arms to other nations or factions that our leaders believe hold good interest to us is common place. The intent was to secure our hostages. However, there was an arms embargo at the time that didn't allow an overt exchange.

How are the two remotely similar?

the ability to define "purpose and intent" is a critical thinking skill that we all could endeavor to hone to a sharp edge. Some more that others.
 
The entire Fast & Furious criminal enterprise is just sickening. It's just another in a very long line of crimes committed by politicians so no real surprise there.

The bigger question is why hasn't the "crime fighting duo" :rolleyes: of Issa and Gowdy been able to bring ANYONE to justice on that one, or on any other Obama admin crime for that matter.

Those two useless idiots are right in line behind Boehner and McConnell for needing to go.
 
Last edited:
Duh.

Doesn't fit mainstream agenda.

Although the news said Biden may throw his hat in the ring.

Would LOVE to see those two go after each other!!!
 
You do realize the difference between the two, don't you?

Providing firearms to criminals unable to obtain them lawfully, to provide the support for an untrue claim, in order to create the push to further strip citizens of their rights is not just immoral, unethical and a violation of the oath of office it is illegal.

Nations providing small arms to other nations or factions that our leaders believe hold good interest to us is common place. The intent was to secure our hostages. However, there was an arms embargo at the time that didn't allow an overt exchange.

How are the two remotely similar?

the ability to define "purpose and intent" is a critical thinking skill that we all could endeavor to hone to a sharp edge. Some more that others.
GLWS
 
Back
Top Bottom