by Sher Zieve
Osvaldo Aldrete Davila is an admitted Mexican drug dealer who regularly transports Marijuana and other illegal narcotics across the US-Mexico border. In February 2005, US Border Patrol Agents Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean, who said Davila had a gun, fired on Davila and the drug dealer fled back across the border. It was later discovered that Davila had been hit, in one of his buttocks, by a bullet. The US Border Agents, not Davila, were convicted of "violating Davila’s civil rights".
For testifying against the Border Agents, drug dealer Davila was given immunity from prosecution on his own drug charges. Instead, Agent Ramos was sentenced to 11 years in prison and Agent Compean received a 12 year prison term. Davila is expected to renew his drug trade, as soon as possible. Note: The Mexican influence at the US border is growing even larger.
Another shooting of an illegal by the US Border Patrol (USBP) occurred last Friday. After responding to reports that six or seven illegals had crossed the border from Mexico into the US, a USBP Agent confronted them. Six of the seven were taken into custody without incident. However, the seventh—Francisco Javier Dominguez Rivera—is said to have violently resisted arrest. Reportedly fearing for his life, the USBP Agent shot and killed Rivera. Now, the Mexican government (including its President Felipe Calderon) has condemned the shooting and issued a diplomatic memo to the US in protest. Details of the incident are still sketchy. But, in true "hang ‘em then try ‘em" mode, Mexico is wielding its clout. Mexico already believes the US belongs to it. Clearly, from the Mexican government’s perspective, the US Border Patrol no longer has the right to protect the US border. No doubt, the next step will be the anti-American United Nations’ intervention—telling the US to "cease and desist" any protection of its sovereign borders. A new UN resolution will probably, also, state that doing so ‘violates human rights’.
Muslims also continue to thwart our customs, protections and legal system. We have Muslim cabbies at Minneapolis Airport refusing to accept passengers who are transporting alcohol or require the use of seeing-eye dogs. "Religious reasons" are given. We have Islamic Imams pushing the envelope of both decency and reason by standing up on American commercial planes, praying loudly and making anti-US statements. Then, they request not-needed seatbelt extensions (which can easily be used as weapons) and seat themselves around planes in a manner reminiscent of the 9/11 hijackers. When removed from the plane for their outrageous behaviors (due to complaints from other passengers) they not only request formal apologies from the airline but, threaten to sue. The latest Muslim "outrage" has been leveled at US carrier Northwest Airlines. On Wednesday forty Muslims, returning to Detroit from a Hajj pilgrimage, did not follow the rules. A one-hour check in, before the flight, is required on the trip from Frankfurt, Germany to Detroit. As they had not yet been cleared for the flight, the group was not allowed to board and was included on the next flights out. Despite the fact that non-Muslims are required to adhere to this dictate, or not fly, the Muslims did not follow the rules. Instead, they are now claiming discrimination. They are, also, threatening a lawsuit (for monetary compensation) against Northwest airlines. Note: If they follow through with their threats and receive said compensation, I wonder where they will send their ill-gotten gains.
In true politically-correct fashion (now only reserved for Muslims), Northwest caved and issued the statement: "The passengers were accommodated on the next available flights to Detroit. We sincerely apologize for any inconvenience this may have caused the passengers." CAIR’s Michigan Director Dawud Walid said the apology is not enough and issued his own statement: "Northwest has not taken full responsibility!" A spokesman for the airline added that compensation for the Muslim passengers was ‘being discussed’.
Wouldn’t you like to receive money for not following airline rules? All non-Muslims could arrive 20 minutes before a flight and claim "discrimination" when they’re not allowed to board. However, Muslims believe that they are superior to all other groups. Their Quran teaches: "Ye are the best of peoples evolved for mankind"—Surah 3:110. They believe that Muslims are not subject to man-made laws, as are others. And the liberal world is agreeing with them—more and more each and every day.
I wonder how much longer it will be until Muslims are exempt, altogether, from airport screenings and are allowed to commit any heinous crimes they wish. After all—terrorism is just another ideological stance, isn’t it? I have to believe that the ACLU (who regularly partners with CAIR-the "Council on American-Islamic Relations"-on lawsuits) is already working on this theory towards arguing it in court.
These examples make it increasingly obvious that sanity has flown to another, as yet unknown, location. Up is now down, black is white, good is bad and self-protection is no longer allowed.
Sher Zieve is a staff writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. The New Media Alliance is a non-profit (501c3) national coalition of writers, journalists and grass-roots media outlets.