Congressional hearings into BATF, might be interesting, worth a look


PDA






alan
February 13, 2006, 04:52 PM
ALERT FROM JEWS FOR THE PRESERVATION OF FIREARMS OWNERSHIP
America's Aggressive Civil Rights Organization

February 13, 2006

JPFO ALERT: BATFE Hearings to be Webcast

The BATFE Congressional hearings that we announced last
week http://www.jpfo.org/alert20060209.htm will be
broadcasted live via webcast on February 15 at 4:30pm EST.
For details, please visit
http://judiciary.house.gov/schedule.aspx and click the 15th
on the calendar shown.

We ask that you pay particular attention to who would dare
to defend this rogue agency, who tries to cover up for
their arrogance, and who tries to "compromise" (read:
"betray") gun owner rights.

Please share this alert with the millions of other gun
owners in the US and ask them to watch the proceedings. Do
your "representatives" indeed represent YOU?

- The Liberty Crew


============================================================

JPFO mirror site: http://www.jpfo.net

============================================================

LET JPFO KEEP YOU INFORMED -- Sign up today for JPFO Alerts!
Just send a blank e-mail to jpfoalerts-subscribe@jpfo.org.
To unsubscribe, send a blank email to
jpfoalerts-unsubscribe@jpfo.org

If you enjoyed reading about "Congressional hearings into BATF, might be interesting, worth a look" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
txgho1911
February 15, 2006, 01:08 PM
Anyone going to watch online and record it?

Crosshair
February 15, 2006, 01:31 PM
I would, but I don't know what channel to record? I also can't record webcasts.:(

/Anyone know what channel?

A. Patriot
February 15, 2006, 02:53 PM
They got away with murder at Waco.

ATF Agent Jim Cavanaugh (who was crying in front of a congressional committee "they were shooting cannons at us. Our guns sounded like pop guns") is today heading up the Alabama church fire investigation.

fletcher
February 15, 2006, 04:38 PM
Watching it now.

Smurfslayer
February 15, 2006, 04:43 PM
Let's all thank that FFL for basically saying he wants restrictions on "non licensed dealers". Way to go ****** :fire: :fire: :fire:

Frankly, between him and Gellis(sp?), there's an awful lot of sucking up to ATF here... Maybe the business didn't fall off because of the heavy LE presence, but rather the 'elitist' attitude put forth by some of the principals involved in the show:rolleyes:

fletcher
February 15, 2006, 04:52 PM
So far, the ATF has been accused of profiling minorities and women, hassling customers (at gun shows), and intentionally delaying background checks.

woerm
February 15, 2006, 05:28 PM
by the time I got really bad nonplayer running again the saps had adjourned after less than 1 hour.

what gives.

ftroop whitewash again?

r

Smurfslayer
February 15, 2006, 07:10 PM
Whitewash?:scrutiny: The subcommittee made it clear that they should not expect them to take BATFE out to the woodshed... What I found strong was NRA's private investigator who was able to convey that this was profiling, and attempted minority bullying and intimidation. She was very well composed. The FFL - I think his name was "White" was pretty clear that he did not want "unlicensed dealers" at shows, and that these were people "who had small collections one show, and a bigger one the next show"... He did us no favors. Sheila Lee capitalized on that... Gelles(sp?) said "if I saw a sale in the parking lot, I'd run them off!" direct quote. She didn't do us any favors either with her testimony. Feb 28 is the ATF's turn.

LAR-15
February 15, 2006, 07:16 PM
Who is Gelles?

Smurfslayer
February 15, 2006, 07:36 PM
She's the show promoter.

LAR-15
February 15, 2006, 07:42 PM
Gotcha.

Just another person who cares more about $$$$ than the SA

woerm
February 15, 2006, 10:28 PM
they should have been there to 'defend' their actions.

which btw are indefensible

does anyone have a copy of the mess it took me too long to get realplayer reinstalled

whitewash is when ftroop get a bye to reherse their


'we're working really hard on anti terror and arson sir just doing our job' :cool: bs again.

their job is tax collection not mass arrest of 'politically undesirable milita types'

or intimidation of law gun purchasers.

get over to subguns nfa and search on the times for transfers

months, years etc :cuss:

I'm not real impressed with this debacle

no ftroop some witnesses that the subcom will ignore, again

:banghead:

alan
February 16, 2006, 12:35 PM
woerm wrote:

they should have been there to 'defend' their actions.

which btw are indefensible

does anyone have a copy of the mess it took me too long to get realplayer reinstalled

whitewash is when ftroop get a bye to reherse their


'we're working really hard on anti terror and arson sir just doing our job' bs again.

their job is tax collection not mass arrest of 'politically undesirable milita types'

or intimidation of law gun purchasers.

get over to subguns nfa and search on the times for transfers

months, years etc

Re his comments, interested parties might note the following. Rep. Jim Sensenbrenner, WI. is Committee Chairman, and also A GREAT SUPPORTER OF ATF.

During the course of the broadcast, approximately 1 hour, he offered the following, MULTIPLE TIMES. "We are not here to buggywhip ATF". One supposes that, by his lights, the purpose of these hearings was the copious application of WHITEWASH. Personally, I think that the application of a 20 foot long oxhide trail whip would have been much more appropriate.

By the way, respecting mention of the lady who was promoting these Richmond area gun shows, so far as can be seen, she was operating in full compliance with relevant statutes, more than can be said for the ATF. Of course, the ATF and the mobs that came and went before it appeared on the scene all had "checkered" records. Anyone remember the shooting of Kenyon Ballew in 1971, and then there was WACO, to mention just two examples of YOUR TAX DOLLARS AT WORK. Unfortunately,YOUR CIVIL RIGHTS, suffer as a result of the above mentioned.

JohnBT
February 16, 2006, 02:13 PM
"Just another person who cares more about $$$$ than the SA"

She rents the property, pays the insurance and is responsible for what goes on there. And yes, it's a business and she needs to sell tickets to meet expenses.

OTOH, using your logic, you wouldn't have any objections to me bringing strangers to your house and selling them guns in your living room with no supervision whatsoever. After all, you wouldn't get into any trouble if the guns were hot and the buyers were felons, would you? Think your insurance carrier would continue your coverage if they found out about it?

Think about it.

John

alan
February 17, 2006, 12:14 AM
I had seen this earlier, and said something about it at the time. Seeing it again now, here it is, ""Just another person who cares more about $$$$ than the SA", brings the following to mind.

I wonder as to what "SA" refers to, but more important than that is the following, re the person who originally posted this thought. Are you opposed to, or would you find fault with this lady, as you seem to do, were she running say a FAST FOOD OUTLET, or a GROCERY STORE? After all, one assumes that her intent re such activity would also be THE MAKING OF MONEY. Just curious.

If you enjoyed reading about "Congressional hearings into BATF, might be interesting, worth a look" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!