Posted on 01/24/2007 5:51:23 AM PST by NapkinUser
Calls State of the Union speech 'total sellout of the United States of America to Mexico'
Monica Ramos, the wife of one of two U.S. Border Patrol agents imprisoned last week for wounding an escaping drug smuggler, attended the State of the Union speech in person last night – and was sharply critical of President Bush, calling him a hypocrite and worse.
Ramos, wife of Border Patrol agent Ignacio Ramos, attended the event as a guest of Rep. Dana Rohrabacher, R-Calif.
Ignacio Ramos and Jose Alonso Compean began prison sentences last week, of 11 and 12 years respectively, for their actions in the shooting and wounding of a Mexican drug smuggler who was granted full immunity to testify against them.
At the conclusion of the speech, Ramos, emotional and in tears, told WND in an exclusive interview, that she considered President Bush's speech compete hypocrisy.
"How could President Bush say that he wanted to secure our borders and that he would double the size of the Border Patrol when my husband is in prison," she asked WND. "Ignacio was trying to secure our border from drug smugglers. And what do we get? I have to show my children their father in prison in chains and I have to explain to them that the president of the United States is a liar."
WND waited nearly an hour after the speech was concluded to be able to speak with a clearly emotionally upset Monica Ramos.
"President Bush can say all he wants that the solution to border security is new infrastructure and technology," Ramos told WND, "but as long as my husband is in jail the American people should know that President Bush doesn't mean a word he says."
"What I sat in the gallery and heard tonight," she said, "was a total sell-out of the United States of America to Mexico. I heard President Bush's message loud and clear. All the president has to offer is electronic gadgets. Meanwhile, our borders are wide open to illegal immigrants, criminals and drug smugglers. God help the honest men and women of the Border Patrol who want to do their duty. It's a losing battle – just ask my husband, he'll tell you the truth."
"The American people only need to ask me," Ramos pleaded to WND. "Tell America that President Bush doesn't mean a word of what he says about border security. My husband is in jail for trying to capture a drug smuggler and President Bush wants electronics? My husband is a hero and President Bush is a traitor as far as I'm concerned. Let him tell my children that he wants new 'infrastructure' or 'comprehensive immigration reform' when their dad who wore the Border Patrol badge for years is shackled and in chains for doing his job."
Rohrabacher agreed with Ramos, emphasizing to WND that "the Bush administration has a hidden agenda with Mexico and that agenda is to keep our border with Mexico wide open, even to drug smugglers."
Asked what message he wanted to send by inviting Ramos' wife to attend the speech in person, Rohrabacher explained: "I wanted to give Mrs. Ramos the opportunity to be in the room and look President Bush right in the face, knowing that this was the man who was destroying her life by his decision to prosecute her husband to the hilt."
Rohrabacher described the injustice he perceived in emotional terms: "By prosecuting these two Border Patrol agents while the drug smuggler is given immunity, President Bush has brutalized the lives of agents Ramos and Compean with a decision that threatens to destroy their families. The wives and the young children of these two Border Patrol agents are now being driven into poverty. The families have no health insurance, they are now losing their homes, and they face a mountain of debt to lawyers. This is a travesty of justice and a personal tragedy that should make President Bush ashamed.
Asked if he had achieved his purpose in inviting Monica Ramos to attend the speech, Rohrabacher told WND:
My purpose after hearing the State of the Union tonight is doubly resolved. President Bush needs to know that we will not rest until Border Patrol [officers] Ramos and Compean are set free.
In history there are cases where heroic people were brutalized and sacrificed by political powers in order to achieve a certain agenda. In this case, I think that's what's happening.
We have an administration that has a hidden agenda with Mexico such that George Bush wants an open border, even though an open border is not in the interests of the American people.
These Border Patrol agents are caught in the middle. They're Americans and they know what their job is supposed to be. They are being persecuted and prosecuted for our sake because they are getting in the way of a power play that has yet been disclosed to the public.
It brutalizes the lives and destroys the families of men who have been willing to sacrifice their lives for us for the last five and 10 years. This is both a tragedy and a travesty.
The continued insistence of the administration to prosecute these Border Patrol agents and to put them in jail and to shackle them and see the families of these men being driven into destitution – this indicates that there has been a decision right at the top that's based on arrogance and cruelty that I think unfortunately reflects our president. It's a side of the president that is now coming out.
We get calls back from the underlings, the assistant congressional liaison officers. This president doesn't return phone calls and he is arrogant and nasty and doesn't treat people very well, not even members of Congress.
The statement we're trying to make is that the president's policy along the border is responsible for murders, drug dealers and terrorists entering the country, millions of illegals. His policy has resulted in the undermining of those law enforcement officers guarding the border, he has totally demoralized the Border Patrol, and in the process of him trying to send a message to the Border Patrol he's destroying the lives of two families. … This person looking right into the face of the president in the same room, this mother of three, her life is being destroyed by President Bush's decision to fully prosecute to the hilt her husband.
American citizens need to rally around these two Border Patrol agents and should call the White House directly to register their protest to this travesty of justice.
President Bush made no reference to the Border Patrol case in a 50-minute speech that focused on domestic issues in the first half and international issues in the second half.
Monica Ramos told WND she was in Washington, D.C., to attend a meeting yesterday afternoon with concerned congressmen.
At least 70 members of the House have signed on to a resolution ordering a congressional pardon that would toss out the convictions and immediately free the former agents.
Monica Ramos described her first meeting with her husband in prison as "heart breaking."
Ramos confirmed the account provided WND by her father, Joe Loya. She acknowledged her husband is being held in solitary confinement in a 6-by-12 foot cell, without windows. Ignacio Ramos is not being allowed any exercise time, and he is shackled every time he leaves his cell.
"This may be for his protection from other inmates," Monica Ramos acknowledged to WND, "but this is abusive. They are treating my husband like the worst hardened criminal imaginable."
She said one of her three young children is so disturbed by the imprisonment that the family has decided to seek counseling for the child.
"My children are planning to visit their father for the first time this Friday," she said, expressing concern. "This will be the first time they see their dad shackled in chains, when they are used to seeing me send him off in his badge and uniform."
The couple's youngest child is 7 years old, the others are aged 9 and 13.
"My youngest child wanted to know if we could order pizza for dad in prison," Monic Ramos said. "No, I told him. Let's wait and have pizza night when daddy gets home."
sorry...but I'm not buying into your delusion. Get over him.
Now is the time for the country to unite, in spite of Bush. The sovereignty and security of the nation I love and cherish, is at stake.
Apparently, my point is lost on you. Questioning my motives is a sure sign you've lost the argument, but keep going . . . I'm here all evening.
And the jury who convicted the agents, you forget.
Personally, I think the reason these guys tried to coverup what they had done is because they knew that what they had just done was illegal. That is the only reason I can think of as to why they would have "panicked" in the first place. From what I have learned, B.P. agents have cause to fire their weapons often throughout the year, and some of those situations have ended with the suspect being killed. And yet none of those B.P. agents faced charges nor reprimands, etc., because they followed the law and the procedures in place for reporting such events.
You said, "How hard would it have been for t hem to say he had a gun in his pants and turned to fire? Who would have known the difference?" Yes, I suppose if they could have come up with a better lie. However, is that what we want our law enforcement officers to do? Become good liars?
These two agents had a reason for getting rid of the evidence. That fact alone should speak volumes.
Furthermore, instead of issuing a warrant for the Drug Dealers arrest, what does Sutton do? He seeks out the criminal and offers him immunity and free medical care here in the US to testify against two of our OWN law enforcement officers. It's a total lack of integrity on Suttons part.
Isn't this the way they do things in Mexico? Drug Dealers "rule" and most of the cops are on the "take"?
Are we going down that same path?
sw
That is the account offered by Sutton. It has been disputed.
no weapon was found (presumably no one bothered to look)
Aldrete-Davila fled to Mexican territory and got in a van that drove off, not to return to US soil for a month. How exactly do you think they would find a weapon?
no one (Compean and Ramos included) even bothered to take cover before, during, or after the shooting.
Take cover in an open area? LOL. Keep 'em comin'!
Do you not know the difference between giving advice and stating facts? It seems not. What then would give me reason to believe that you are capable of understanding a penal code?
agreed!! Also 'rude...' ignores the three jurors who stated they caved to pressure because they were told a hung jury was not an option! see worldnetdaily for info
Got it. Everything's disputed, except the accounts of Ramos and Compean themselves, which are unimpeachable.
Who said they were lied to and deceived. But don't let that little inconveninet fact get in your way.
"See World Net Daily for info." is part of your problem, but I digress. Tell me, is this the first time you've heard a juror complain to the press after a trial?
Sutton should be impeached and this case should be a priority for all Americans until Bush grants a full pardon to Ramos and Compean.
After what happened to the Pendleton 8 for doing their job and given the Presidnet's de facto amnesty position on illegal immigration, I can see why tehy might well panic after doign exactly what they're supposed to do.
The applicable statute, Penal Law § 35.30(4)(b), reads as follows:
A private person acting on his own account may use physical force, other than deadly physical force, upon another person when and to the extent that he reasonably believes such to be necessary to effect an arrest or to prevent the escape from custody of a person whom he reasonably believes to have committed an offense and who in fact has committed such offense; and he may use deadly physical force for such purpose when he reasonably believes such to be necessary to:
* * * * * * (b) Effect the arrest of a person who has committed murder, manslaughter in the first degree, robbery, forcible rape or forcible sodomy and who is in immediate flight therefrom.
your bias is clear and really part of the problem
I certainly did not say that. But in the credibilty contest, they are beating Sutton to a pulp.
On that, we agree, CindyDawg. I fear that it is going to take another terrorist attack before our government officials will do what needs to be done, and fast, to secure our borders. Homeland Security has done a lot since 9/11, but one does not secure their home with the finest security system money can buy, and then leave their back door wide open.
I wish people who are debating the Ramos/Compean case would debate the case on its own merits. I do not believe that Ramos and Compean are innocent victims but that does not mean that I am for open borders and illegal immigration.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.