U.S. preference for who gets the drone — Is race a factor in the decision?

On February 18, federal prosecutors in Minnesota announced charges against three men Vsama Dawich Haamade, 53; his brother, Issam Darwich Hamade, 55; and Samin Ahmed Berro, 64 for conspiring to illegally export drone aircraft technology to Hezbollah, which the U.S. government defines as a “terrorist organization.”

But Russia is also an enemy of the U.S. government just like Hezbollah, and Russia has drone aircraft and drone technology equal to that of the United States.

So why is the U.S. so accepting of Russia having drones yet then have no tolerance for Muslims trying to piece together a drone with spare parts? If the U.S. can live with Russia’s drones, why can’t the U.S. live with Hezbollah having a homemade Wal-Mart type drone?

This is about racism, making sure that enemies of the United States — who are people of color — do not get even some basic drone technology and then have no problem with the White men in Russia having advance drone technology. Trying to stop Russia from building drones would make the most sense.

The U.S. uses drones, so how can anyone trying to acquire drone technology be doing something illegal? Trying to acquire drone technology is not terrorism.

It is a clever setup, calling people “terrorists,” then no matter what they do it is illegal. You have your primary enemy Russia doing the same activity as the terrorists and it is not illegal; Russia’s drones are not seen as illegal.

 

Frank Erickson lives in Minneapolis.