Well...I see part of Arizonas OWN problem in this statement:

Customers can legally buy as many weapons as they want in Arizona as long as they're 18 or older and pass a criminal background check. There are no waiting periods and no need for permits, and buyers are allowed to resell the guns. "In Arizona," says Voth, "someone buying three guns is like someone buying a sandwich."

This is from almost the end of the article;

“But CBS didn't quote the portions of Voth's e-mail that described how the group was divided by "petty arguing" and "adolescent behavior." Instead, CBS claimed the schism had been caused by opposition to gun walking (such alleged opposition is not discussed anywhere in the e-mail, which is below). CBS asserted that Dodson and others had protested the tactic "over and over," and then quoted portions of Voth's e-mail in a way that left the impression that gun walking was endorsed at headquarters.”

The news media has been doing this for a long time, they just haven’t realized they can’t get away with it any more. NBC did some selective editing with a speech by Romney last week and then some more with that Zimmerman transcript.

There are a couple of interesting points which smell greatly;

“Voth arrived in Phoenix in December 2009 only to discover that his group had not been funded. The group had little equipment and no long guns, electronic devices, or binoculars, forcing Voth to scrounge for supplies.

Then there was Voth's seven-agent team, which was almost instantly at war with itself. Most of the agents were transplants, unfamiliar with Arizona or one another.”

Why, why was this team unfunded and a group unfamiliar with the problems in Arizona?? Seems a little deliberate!

“Their greatest difficulty by far, however, was convincing prosecutors that they had sufficient grounds to seize guns and arrest straw purchasers. By June 2010 the agents had sent the U.S. Attorney's office a list of 31 suspects they wanted to arrest, with 46 pages outlining their illegal acts. But for the next seven months prosecutors did not indict a single suspect…..Emory Hurley, the assistant U.S. Attorney in Phoenix overseeing the Fast and Furious case, told the agents they lacked probable cause for arrests, according to ATF records….They say they seized weapons whenever they could but were hamstrung by prosecutors and weak laws, which stymied them at every turn.”

This Hurley seems to have put up road blocks wherever he could, why? Who was pulling Hurley’s strings??

“Among the discoveries: Fast and Furious' top suspects—Sinaloa Cartel operatives and Mexican nationals who were providing the money, ordering the guns, and directing the recruitment of the straw purchasers—turned out to be FBI informants who were receiving money from the bureau. That came as news to the ATF agents in Group VII.”

It does seem someone was manipulating them all the way around.

Now there is a big difference between fast and furious and the Bush’s Wide Receiver program.

In Bush’s program they were working with the Mexican government and they placed tracking devices on the guns. 1400 arrest were made, not sure how many of those were found guilty in Mexico. Once the bad guys figured out there were tracking devices on the guns they disabled them so the program was shut down in 2007.

In Obama’s program which started 2 years later but  the Mexican government was not informed. The guns were not tagged and not followed across the boarder in anyway. No one was arrested but at least 200 Mexican citizens and probably many more are dead along with one US boarder agent.

The whole thing is shameful! 

I can not find the post but in a thread on BN a poster said that  fast and furious  was going  to be a bigger scandal than Watergate.  That may be true but the culprits will be  Republican  senators, congress and Anti Obama PACs and news outlets. 

Jun 28, 2012 -- 9:41AM, fodaoson wrote:

"...That may be true but the culprits will be  Republican  senators, congress and Anti Obama PACs and news outlets." 

So True!!!

And,

I think Issa is slowly melting

www.newsday.com/opinion/oped/sanchez-iss...

Freedom and democratic forms of government are difficult to manage.   Often one person’s freedom limits another’s; ones pursuit of happiness infringes on another’s pursuit.  Domestic tranquility, general welfare and common defense can place burdens on some.   

 The freedom of speech and a free press as currently interpreted  means that an individual can tell half-truths and outright lies, can use offensive language  and print the same.

  The second amendment means that  most persons  can   possess an trade or sell arms  as they wish. Some cities  and states limit concealed weapons and others, but some states  do not have the same limitations. 

    Guns, and propaganda are  two difficulties we face as  free people.