In any normal case in Texas of a man who had murdered a mother while carjacking her vehicle, the sentence would have been a slam-dunk trip to the executioner. But since killer Timoteo Rios escaped to his native Mexico, the Mexican government required a promise of no capital punishment in order to allow the perp’s extradition.
So the jury quickly found him guilty of capital murder and the sentence was an automatic life in prison.
The Houston murder got a lot of attention in 2008 because the victim, Tina Davila (pictured), was the mother of five who was protecting her baby in a carseat from being taken along with the SUV.
A jury on Thursday took only an hour to convict Timoteo Rios of capital murder in the stabbing death of a woman protecting her 4-month-old baby from a would-be carjacker.
The April 2008 incident, including Tina Davila’s struggle with a man over her car keys and her collapse inside a cellphone store in east Houston, was captured on surveillance video that was presented during opening arguments in the two-day trial.
Rios, a 26-year-old Mexican national who has lived in the U.S. since he was 2, received an automatic sentence of life in prison without parole.
Davila’s older daughter, 20-year-old Patricia Matt, said the sentence was a good outcome since Rios was not eligible for the death penalty.
The Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) scandal of sending guns to Mexican organized crime in a poorly considered “sting” is moving along with a Congressional hearing next week to be chaired by Rep. Darrell Issa.
Every news report brings more details of how the Fast and Furious guns were used in crimes, including the killing of Agent Brian Terry in a gun battle on American soil. One ATF weapon shot down a Mexican helicopter, and up to 150 Mexicans have been killed by guns from the program.
The hearing to be held next Wednesday by the Oversight Committee will be the second one examining the gunrunning scandal. The May 3 hearing was quite lively, where Attorney General Holder got a thorough and well deserved grilling. Senator Grassley, a leader on this issue, will testify, as will the family of Brian Terry.
Rep. Issa stated last month that the decision to pursue the gunrunning scheme was made in Washington, not by officials located on the border. He has compared it to Iran Contra in terms of government stonewalling, since the ATF has not responded to his subpoenas.
I hope someone will ask why the administration doesn’t want law-abiding citizens to own guns, but is fine with shipping heavy duty firearms to Mexican organized crime.
Officials at the Department of Justice are in “panic mode,” according to multiple sources, as word spreads that congressional testimony next week will paint a bleak and humiliating picture of Operation Fast and Furious, the botched undercover operation that left a trail of blood from Mexico to Washington, D.C.
The operation was supposed to stem the flow of weapons from the U.S. to Mexico by allowing so-called straw buyers to purchase guns legally in the U.S. and later sell them in Mexico, usually to drug cartels.
Instead, ATF documents show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco and Firearms knowingly and deliberately flooded Mexico with assault rifles. Their intent was to expose the entire smuggling organization, from top to bottom, but the operation spun out of control and supervisors refused pleas from field agents to stop it.
Only after Border Patrol Agent Brian Terry died did ATF Agent John Dodson blow the whistle and expose the scandal.
“What people don’t understand is how long we will be dealing with this,” Dodson told Fox News back in March. “Those guns are gone. You can’t just give the order and get them back. There is no telling how many crimes will be committed before we retrieve them.” Continue reading this article
Was rancher Larry Links shot and killed by an illegal alien? There is no evidence of the identity of the killer. However the 68-year-old man was shot on his property near Interstate 10, a major drug smuggling corridor.
She sat down for an interview with the Vlad Tepes Blog to discuss Muslim diversity.
In the 1990s Storhaug traveled all over Pakistan, even to the tribal areas. She would routinely bicycle around Islamabad at that time. She reports that it was “shocking” to feel the lack of freedom during her recent visit, compared with only a few years ago because of increased Islamization. Her friends told her not to leave the city because of safety concerns.
When asked about safety for women now that so many Muslims live in Scandinavia, she replied, “There is no doubt that the freedom, the level of freedom I had as a young woman, young women in Norway will not have, and don’t have actually today and they will not have it in the future, as far as I can see. So the freedom for women in Europe is going backwards.”
“Girls in school, they are mocked by Muslim boys and they dye their hair black, yes. Blondes are dying their hair black, that is correct. And some of them also move to other parts of Oslo to be let alone.”
Senator Jeff Sessions was being interviewed on the subject of the Senate’s budget irresponsibility, but he made a point of hailing the Supreme Court’s decision regarding Hazleton’s version of local immigration enforcement. Then he went on to condemn the Senate’s paralysis on writing a budget and the dangers of dithering while the economy heads off a cliff.
What a disappointment that the Supremes let stand the lower court ruling allowing taxpayer-subsidized in-state tuition for illegal aliens. The Court appear to have no respect for taxpayers, sovereignty or basic fairness.
California in particular suffers from continuing wealth extraction caused by invasive foreigners who delight in bleeding us dry — in billions of tax dollars spent yearly for education, prisons and welfare benefits.
Someone should tell the moochers that a successful parasite does not kill the host.
It’s ridiculous to waste money we don’t have educating people who won’t be able to work legally upon graduation. That will be their next squawk, of course. The demands are never-ending.
A California law that gives illegal aliens a break on college tuition and resembles a controversial proposal before Congress will not get closer scrutiny by the Supreme Court.
The justices announced Monday they will not hear arguments in a case brought by thousands of California college students who pay out-of-state tuition rates. The students object to a state law allowing their classmates, who are illegal aliens, the conditional ability to pay in-state or “resident” rates.
The dispute comes as some lawmakers on Capitol Hill continue to press for passage of the DREAM Act. The legislation allows illegal aliens to earn citizenship by attending college or enlisting in the military.
While the case centers on a California law designed to benefit illegal immigrants, the state’s legal case is very similar to the arguments used by other states, namely Arizona, which have pursued legislation to crack down on illegal aliens. In each instance, the states claim that its law is not preempted by Congress.
The student opponents of California’s 2001 measure contend the tuition break directly conflicts with the main federal immigration law passed five years earlier.
“In the absence of guidance from this court, numerous states have circumvented federal law in this area with impunity,” lawyer Kris Kobach wrote in February, asking the justices to take the case. “They have done so by urging a reading of federal law that reduces it to a dead letter and is contrary to every expression of congressional intent on the matter.”
Kobach contends that federal immigration law prohibits the special kind of residency tuition break California passed unless the benefit is also available to all Americans. In other words, the California measure can only be allowed if all U.S. residents equally qualify for the in-state tuition rate specifically extended to illegal aliens.
In November, the California Supreme Court upheld the state law concluding “the exemption is not based on residence in California. Rather, it is based on other criteria.” It pointed to situations where non-resident students could nonetheless qualify for the “resident” tuition status.
For example, any student with three years’ attendance at a California high school qualifies for the break regardless of his or her home address. This would cover students who crossed the state line to attend a California school, boarding students whose parents live in a different state or students who moved away but wanted to return for college.
“If Congress had intended to prohibit states entirely from making aliens eligible for in-state tuition, it could have easily done so,” Justice Ming Chin wrote for a unanimous court.
Late last year, the House of Representatives passed the DREAM Act that would among other things repeal the in-state tuition ban found in the 1996 immigration law. Senate backers have been unsuccessful in getting the bill to President Obama who fully backs the measure. Opponents have blasted the measure as an amnesty for people who’ve illegally entered the country.
Kobach says the inability of federal lawmakers to pass the DREAM Act “has not dissuaded some state legislatures from taking an alternative path: simply circumventing federal law.”
Nebraska, New Mexico, New York, Texas, Utah and Washington are some of the other states that have passed similar laws. The difference between “resident” and “nonresident” tuition for four years of undergraduate studies at Cal-Berkeley, for example, is $91,512.
The justices offered did not explain why they decided against taking the case.
Turkish Prime Minister Erdogan represents the triumphant Janus-faced approach to the fundamentalist global “Islamic revival.” He and his pious forbears have now completed dismantling Turkey’s secular experiment, and achieved the full-throated re-Islamization of Turkish society, an insidious process begun already within the decade after Ataturk’s death, in 1938. When currying favor with gullible Western audiences, Erdogan burbles disingenuous ecumenical platitudes about the “Alliance of Civilizations.” But in reality, this is an Islamization campaign promoted by the Organization of the Islamic Conference, notably Saudi Arabia, which rewarded Erdogan, for his role in the Alliance, specifically, as “services to Islam,” with the “King Faisal International Prize,” considered the “Nobel prize” of the Arab world. Regardless, Erdogan has always aroused his Muslim constituencies by brazenly appealing to their deep-seated jihadist sentiments as he did while mayor of Istanbul, in 1997, delivering a fiery speech that reminded the masses of these words from the poem “The Soldier’s Prayer,” written (in 1912) by Turkish nationalist poet Ziya Gokalp:
The minarets are our bayonets, the domes our helmets, the mosques our barracks and the faithful our army.
Cited appropriately by successful opponents of minaret construction in Switzerland, such rhetoric should now resonate uncomfortably in America with the online release Monday June 6, 2011 of alarming survey data from a representative national sample of US mosques.
We must first make America a bilingual-bicultural country. History shows, in my opinion, that no nation can survive the tension, conflict and antagonism of two competing languages and cultures. It is a blessing for an individual to be bilingual; it is a curse for a society to be bilingual. One scholar, Seymour Martin Lipset, put it this way: “The histories of bilingual and bicultural societies that do not assimilate are histories of turmoil, tension and tragedy. Canada, Belgium, Malaysia, Lebanon – all face crises of national existence in which minorities press for autonomy, if not independence. Pakistan and Cyprus have divided. Nigeria suppressed an ethnic rebellion. France faces difficulties with its Basques, Bretons and Corsicans.”
Below is a kindergarten class in Mesquite, Texas, which is described as “bilingual.” However, a close look at the alphabet on the wall reveals that it is Spanish, not English.
America is afflicted with a multitude of diversity hustlers, who think that national sovereignty and culture are what’s wrong, rather than the protectors of all we value. Perhaps the diversity blowhards haven’t heard of Czech President Vaclav Klaus’ declaration that “you cannot have democratic accountability in anything bigger than a nation state.”
LOS ANGELES – The Valencia-Fragas household is a mix of cultures and languages embodied in 3-year-old Adan Fragas.
“How do you say blue in Spanish?” Adan’s mother, Edith Valencia, asks him, pointing to a bright blue train in a picture book.
“Azul,” he answers quickly. Then, he looks around the room, waves and says, “Hi.”
Adan speaks English with his father, who is of Hawaiian descent, and Spanish with his mother, whose heritage is Mexican.
That ease with both languages pleases Valencia. When Adan is ready for kindergarten, she wants him to attend one of the first dual language immersion campuses in the Archdiocese of Los Angeles – St. Joan of Arc Dual Language Academy in West Los Angeles. There, he will learn to read, speak and write in English and Spanish.
St. Joan of Arc and All Souls in Alhambra, both closed due to declining enrollment, will reopen this fall as the first dual language schools in the archdiocese. Though not new in public education, such programs are rare in Catholic schools. If they are successful, they could become a model.
“It’s part of who we are, our culture,” Valencia said of the Spanish her parents spoke to her after they had migrated as teenagers to Los Angeles from Mexico.
“I’m close to my roots even though I didn’t grow up in Mexico. I know where my parents came from. … It’s something you can easily overlook and forget. But it’s part of who we are and who he is,” she added.
Both schools will offer English and Spanish in kindergarten. All Souls also will offer an English/Mandarin program. The diocese will add new grade levels each year.
“We’ve got to be sure to have kids who are truly bilingual and biliterate,” said Kevin Baxter, superintendent of elementary schools in the archdiocese. Continue reading this article
There’s good news from the House of Representatives, where positive small-ball immigration enforcement legislation was passed last week.
One example was Rep. Steve King’s amendment to fund the removal of Mexican cartel spotters located in this country who direct the movement of drugs and aliens across the border and north.
The surrender of American territory to Mexican organized crime has been truly shameful. Mexican cartels operate freely in southern Arizona, with spotters up to 100 miles north of the border. But the Obama administration has chosen to prosecute Arizona rather than protect it adequately.
The drunk driving killer of Dawn Glogovski (pictured) was sentenced this week to 30 years imprisonment.
Sadly, the death was a preventable one, had the government done its job of prosecuting, jailing and then deporting criminal illegal aliens. As noted here at the time of the crime, the driver Jorge Dominguez was “an illegal immigrant who was driving with a suspended license and has served jail time in Racine County for several prior offenses.”
The alien’s priors included battery, cocaine possession and obstructing an officer, so he was clearly a violent man who should have been deported to protect the public. But he wasn’t.
KENOSHA – Jorge Dominguez, the man who killed Dawn Glogovski in a drunk driving crash, will spent thirty years in prison for the crime. The sentence was handed down by Kenosha County Judge Barbara Kluka.
In court, Dawn Glogovski’s husband described the pain he and his son feel. “She was everything to me. She was my first and only love,” said Frank Glogovski.
Frank Glogovski was in the car with his wife at the time of the crash and described the scene. “Seeing her fear, her pain. He (Dominguez) ran away. He didn’t try to help us, he ran away because he knew he did something wrong.”
The accident happened in May of 2010 in the Town of Paris.
Dominguez was charged with drunk driving and with injuring Frank Glogovski. Authorities also say Dominguez is an illegal immigrant and used cocaine in the days before accident.
In court, Dominguez asked a court interpreter to read a statement he wrote in Spanish. “If I knew there was some way to cure your pain, I would look for an opportunity to find that,” he wrote to the Glogovski family. ”But unfortunately, there is nothing that I can do.” He also blamed the crash on being an alcoholic.
Judge Barbara Kluka said she thought about the victim and her family. ”I thought to myself during that trial – and I am persuaded again this morning – what a wonderful person this woman must have been,” Kluka said.
After the 30 year prison term, Kluka also ordered 22 years of extended supervision.
The latest employment figures are dismal to say the least. The nation’s economy added the fewest jobs in eight months, and the unemployment rate has gone up to 9.1 percent. Only 54,000 jobs were created in the month of May by private employers.
Even as the economy recovers, the days of 5% unemployment may be gone for good.
A chorus of economists and labor market observers say that the “natural” or “structural” rate of unemployment has shifted up, meaning that Americans looking for work should get used to having a harder time finding it. The unemployment rate is currently 9% and could take until 2016 to reach the natural rate.
The so-called natural unemployment rate is somewhere around 7%, according to Mark Vitner, a senior economist at Wells Fargo. Other economists peg the natural unemployment rate somewhere between 5.5% and 7%. They said the figure will be held higher by a skills mismatch in the labor market that has been growing since the 1970s, the recent extension of unemployment benefits and the 2009 minimum wage increase.
The Los Angeles Times noted today, “Employers in May added just 54,000 to their payrolls, less than half of what’s needed just to keep pace with the expanding working-age population.”
During times of economic boom, business demanded more foreign workers, and Congress complied with generous numbers of employment visas. But now that the problem is too many workers, Washington is silent about the obvious solution: stop importing foreign workers until American employment has reached a normal level — and not the egregious “new normal.”
At the current level of job creation, the correct number of immigrant workers is ZERO.
Apparently there is no double jeopardy in Dutch jurisprudence, as shown by the recent additional trial of Geert Wilders for his committing free speech, following an earlier show trial last year in which he was exonerated.
At the crux is Wilders’ insistence on warning Europe about the threat of Islam. The fact that the charge is true is no defense. The Dutch tradition of jawboning through disagreements to reach consensus worked well enough when the parties were Netherlands people; throwing hostile Muslims into the society has upset the balance. So the Dutch are prosecuting a member of their own Parliament for inciting hatred against Muslim immigrants.
Geert Wilders made a final statement to the court as the trial wound up. It was a stirring defense of free speech, the sort of thing one hears less and less these days.
Mister President, members of the Court,
I am here because of what I have said. I am here for having spoken. I have spoken, I speak and I shall continue to speak. Many have kept silent, but not Pim Fortuyn, not Theo Van Gogh, and not I.
I am obliged to speak. For the Netherlands is under threat of Islam. As I have argued many times, Islam is chiefly an ideology. An ideology of hatred, of destruction, of conquest. It is my strong conviction that Islam is a threat to Western values, to freedom of speech, to the equality of men and women, of heterosexuals and homosexuals, of believers and unbelievers.
All over the world we can see how freedom is fleeing from Islam. Day by day we see our freedoms dwindle.
Islam is opposed to freedom. Renowned scholars of Islam from all parts of the world agree on this. My expert witnesses subscribe to my view. There are more Islam scholars whom the court did not allow me to call upon to testify. All agree with my statements, they show that I speak the truth. That truth is on trial today.
We must live in the truth, said the dissidents under Communist rule, because the truth will set us free. Truth and freedom are inextricably connected. We must speak the truth because otherwise we shall lose our freedom.
Fair Use: This site contains copyrighted material, the use of which has not always been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. We are making such material available in our efforts to advance understanding of issues related to culture and mass immigration. We believe this constitutes a "fair use" of any such copyrighted material as provided for in section 107 of the US Copyright Law. In accordance with Title 17 U.S.C. Section 107, the material on this site is distributed without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. For more information, see: http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode17/usc_sec_17_00000107----000-.html. In order to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond "fair use", you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.