Canales News Briefs

March 9, 2009

To All,

And that's just what is happening in Hartford, Connecticut. Imagine what must be "going down" in Washington D.C.:

And Then They Came For...:

One of the fascinating aspects of history is it's repetitiveness. Many things that have happened before, elsewhere, seem to sprout out of the backround like so many characters from a Roger Corman film.

But since we are not protected from Martin Niemöller's warning by anything more than a hopeful American exceptionalism (and perhaps our tendency to eschew the pretensions of those elites born with silver coke spoons in their mouths), then perhaps this week's coming events in Connecticut should cause one to sit up and take notice.

It seems that Connecticut State Senator Andrew McDonald (D-Stamford) and State Representative Michael Lawlor (D-East Haven) have introduced a bill, SB 1098, in the Connecticut State Legislature that would change the corporate nature of only Roman Catholic parishes across the state of Connecticut.

Priests, bishops, Archbishops, and Cardinals would apparently be relegated to what appears to be an advisory role, leaving the running of parishes to what appears to be an almost "Protestant" form of church governance by elected laymembers.

Now, one could say that the forms of church governance are hardly of interest to more secular interest groups involved in such non-spiritual matters as the Castle Doctrine and concealed carry. Or that too many Catholic officials have chimed in at times in notorious agreement with the evil designs of those who would disarm us in the face of criminality and tyranny from a wide variety of quarters.

But in reality, in this case, an attack on Catholic churches (as well as Catholic charities and Catholic hospitals) through means of forced corporate reformation is an attack on all entities that exist as corporations. It's an attack on means of organization (read "self determination") of the GM's, the Citigroups, the Nature Conservancies, the Shell's, and, of course, the NRA.

What could conceivably come to pass in that Bluest of States, Connecticut could also come to pass next door in New York. Selective targeting of corporations, either secular or non-secular, could result in the kind of chilling effect that can only be undone by "oiled Winchesters" and determined action.

Historically speaking, this not the first time that an over-reaching government has tried to impose control on religious self-determination. Henry VIII was theoretically looking for a good divorce attorney when he ran into Church opposition over ditching Catherine of Aragon (after all the paperwork they had to go through in dealing with undoing Catherine's marriage to Henry's older brother, who had died a tad prematurely). His "hostile" takeover of the Church in England can be said by some to have not gone down smoothly, to say the least.

Likewise can be said about Hitler's attempt to take over Christianity in Germany in the consolidation of German society prior to the Polish invasion.

In both cases, the faiths involved stood on principles that opposed various elements of the political plan of the day. These hostile takeovers, if recreated today, could only lead one to conclude that the State of Connecticut has suddenly found Catholicism standing in the way of some agenda, or agendas (In fact, there are many issues that the Connecticut legislature would apparently prefer the Church to acquiesce to these days.).

But once Legislatures get used to the idea of silencing opponents by selectively legislating corporate reorganization, there will be no end to it. In the case of the Catholic Church, one can only imagine the motivations of the elected officials involved in wanting to tamper with something so near and dear to the hearts of so many of their constituents. Suffice it to say that whatever the reason is, the proposed gains may appear to outweigh the risks of messing with the lives of so many registered voters. And if they are targeting such an important group as Catholics today, firearms rights organizations cannot be far behind.

Links at:

http://www.cga.ct.gov/asp/cgabillstatus/cgabillstatus.asp?selBillType=Bill&bill_num=1098&which_year=2009&SUBMIT1.x=

12&SUBMIT1.y=5&SUBMIT1=Normal

http://www.cga.ct.gov/2009/TOB/S/2009SB-01098-R00-SB.htm

Senator Andrew McDonald: Capitol phone: (800) 842-1420; Home phone: (203) 348-7439 E-mail: McDonald@senatedems.ct.gov

Representative Michael Lawlor: Capitol phone: (800) 842-8267; Home phone: (203) 469-9725 E-mail: MLawlor99@juno.com

Bandini By Any Other Name...:

Ruben Navarrette re-argues a tired old nostrum of gun control as "needed" for the current war by the Mexican government to reign in the drug trade and the corruption it brings, in an article of March 8.

Of course, this is a Mexico that, years ago, stood idly by while the trade routes and supply lines were formed as the Ultimate Rat Line for the narcos to funnel their products through their country. In the late 1980's and early 1990's, anecdotal comments from numbers of friends and relatives in Chiapas, Tamaulipas, Chihuahua, and Baja California indicated a certain lack of concern over the matter. Mexicans were just sending the yanquis what they wanted, and disdained any arguments that the drug trade would bring violence to Mexican streets and infect Mexican youth with the same kinds of poisons plaguing citizens in El Norte (They know better now...).

Mexico ignored the drug trade at first, for all the mordida it dropped into the economy, but actually facilitated the drug trade by lobbying for open borders as well as providing the logistics (water, maps, advice) for the mass migration of workers and other starving souls that could not find work in a country otherwise rich in resources. It did not matter to the authorities then that such activities just made it easier to co-opt the pollos into muling drug shipments on their backs. All that did matter is that the trade continue, and that the mordida continue.

Now, of course, the threat of the narcotraficantes to the state is clear, and the new president of Mexico does seem to be putting a full court press in trying to shut down the drug gangs (Better late than never, no?). But does that truly mean that Americans have to give up their hard won rights (versus their ill-chosen drug habits) so that a neighboring country indoctrinated in socialism and the Napoleonic Code can make headway in this modern-day Prohibition? Many of us would say no. Better to hammer a

One of the interesting aspects of Navarrette's story has to do with the references to Operation Gunrunner. Gunrunner, which is an offshoot of Project Exile and the eTrace program established in Canada, Mexico and Columbia and other countries, started in 2005. Operation Gunrunner has been in operation since at least 2007, where in a report entitled "The Accomplishments of the US Department of Justice 2001-2009" , Pages 71-72, the following is noted:

"...Project Gunrunner: Project Gunrunner is ATF’s primary southwest border firearms enforcement initiative for
enhancing border safety for the citizens of Mexico and the United States. ATF’s Gunrunner strategy is to work
in conjunction with domestic and international law enforcement partners to deny “the tools of the trade” to the
firearms trafficking infrastructure of criminal organizations operating in Mexico and along the border. In the
past two years, ATF has seized thousands of firearms illegally headed to Mexico.

Mexican officials claim that an “iron river” of illegal firearms is flowing south from the U.S. into Mexico and
the lethality of captured armaments has increased alarmingly. The arsenals of Mexico’s drug cartels include .50caliber machine guns, anti-tank rockets, grenade launchers, fragmentation grenades and mortars. Ordinary
police units in Mexico are often simply outgunned and therefore are not properly equipped to thwart violent
crime in their country.

In 2007, ATF arrested 299 defendants involved in crimes affecting the southwest border. Of those defendants,
149, or one half of all defendants, were involved in gang-related criminal acts that caused their arrests. One hundred
fourteen of these cases focused on firearms trafficking and involved an estimated 2,500 weapons. ATF
leverages a myriad of resources and initiatives in an effort to combat violent crime.

Firearms tracing: Firearms tracing, in particular the expansion of the eTrace firearms tracing system, is a critical
component of Project Gunrunner in Mexico. Firearm tracing capabilities allow law enforcement to trace a
specific firearm back to its source of sale. This process allows law enforcement to glean insight by following the
chain of distribution for a particular firearm. ATF recently deployed eTrace technology in nine U.S. consulates
in Mexico. ATF has conducted discussions with the government of Mexico with an aim to deploy Spanishlanguage
eTrace to other Mexican agencies.

Deployment of resources: ATF has dedicated approximately 100 special agents and 25 industry operations
investigators to the SWB initiative over the past two years. ATF has recently assigned special agents to specific
areas in New Mexico and Arizona. These assignments are part of a broad plan to increase the strategic coverage
and disrupt the firearms trafficking corridors operating along the border.

EPIC: ATF has established a Gun Desk at the Drug Enforcement Administration’s El Paso Information Center
(EPIC). The Gun Desk serves as a central repository for weapons-related intelligence. Gun Desk staff compile

weapons information and intelligence from federal, state and local law enforcement agencies, as well as foreign
governments such as Mexico.

Preventing firearms diversion: A crucial tool for stemming the illicit flow of firearms between Mexico and the
U.S. border states is ATF’s practice of inspecting federal firearms licensees, as well as their licensed distributors
in the affected areas. These inspections detect and prevent the diversion of firearms. This industry-operations
component of the Southwest Border Firearms Enforcement Initiative includes three activities: forward traces,
secondary market inspections, and outreach to the industry and other law enforcement agencies...."

Given that an official Federal document notes that the entire "take" of confiscated firearms, of all types, in 2007 was some 2,500 weapons, it will be interesting to see what data Navarrette has from Mexican Ambassador Arturo Sarukhan that supports the 2,000 weapons-per-day-from-the-United-States claim in the article (Perhaps this is the "professionalism in journalism", to paraphrase Debra Saunders, that we should demand to see.).

Add to that reporting by the San Antonio Express News' Todd Bensman about a recent confiscation of what he termed Mexico's single largest "stash" of cartel weapons, a whopping 300 "assault rifles", grenade launchers (must have been a sale at a National Guard Armory somewhere), and 500,000 rounds of ammunition, and one wonders as to the total quantities involved. (Assault weapons may be a loose term here, since Bensman labels a Walther semiautomatic rimfire as an "assault-style" rifle).

Oddly enough, Bensman reports that Mexican authorities are still proving remarkably inattentive to a number of firearms smuggling case leads, to the point that an ATF investigation was closed down in Laredo. If anything, Bensman's work points to a certain lack of cooperation by Mexican police with American efforts to trace those who would illegally transport and sell firearms acquired legally or illegally on the U.S. side of the border. If this is true, it calls into question the Mexican national politicians' call for more assault weapons bans in the US as no more than "blame shifting". It will be hard for American gun owners to accept additional regulatory burdens and potential privacy violations through eTrace just so that a foreign government can "pass the peso".

It will be interesting to see if Navarrette, Bensman, and the host of other journalists currently working the the gun smuggling meme will get together and reconcile some of the differences in quantities reported for the same alleged seizures. But if firearms rights activists are ever going to take these "professionals" seriously, in an age when newspapers are dropping like flies, they perhaps should give a tad more credence to the Second Amendment as a right to be preserved, rather than as an "alibi" intended to portray too many as felons. Stay tuned.

Links at:

http://www3.signonsandiego.com/stories/2009/mar/08/z1e8navarre21914/?zIndex=63316

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/documents/doj-accomplishments.pdf

http://baltimore.fbi.gov/dojpressrel/pressrel07/ba071107.htm

http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2006/November/06_opa_768.html

http://www.usdoj.gov/jmd/2008justification/office/36_01_justification.doc

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/Customs_stops_gun_cache_at_Laredo_

bridge.html

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/mexico/Reynosa_still_identifying

_victims_of_deadly_border_violence.html

http://www.mysanantonio.com/news/Customs_officers_find_12_million

_in_cocaine2.html