Anti-immigration group HQ awarded to illegal aliens by court

[Modem Butterfly]

http://www.azdailysun.com/non_sec/nav_includes/story.cfm?storyID=114004

PHOENIX -- An Arizona ranch that once served as the headquarters for a civilian group watching for illegal immigrants has been turned over to two people caught trying to enter the United States illegally.
The ranch was conveyed to satisfy a judgment against its owner, Casey Nethercott, a member of a self-styled border-watch group that seeks to protect private property from illegal immigrants crossing the border from Mexico. Nethercott had been accused of terrorizing the immigrants when he and others caught them in Texas.

Morris Dees Jr., co-founder and chief trial counsel of the Southern Poverty Law Center, which represented the immigrants, said he hoped the ruling would serve as a cautionary tale to landowners or civilian patrols.

"When we got into this case, ranchers all along the border were allowing these types to come on their property," Dees said. "Now, they're very leery of it, especially when they see someone losing their ranch because of it."

Edited for title

[Balbus]

1. self - delete

edit: OP was edited so my comment became irrelevant.

[Modem Butterfly]

2. Whoops! Updated the title

[BrklynLiberal]

3. HA!

:bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce: :bounce:

[Alcibiades]

4. Granted, this guy's a jerk

but it does not make the verdict fair. $500,000 or $850,000 for a pistol-whipping committed against an illegal alien who was in the process of a criminal trespass? That seems a bit steep. Heck, I'll go to Texas and get myself pistol-whipped if it's worth that much!

And these fellows get to stay in the US!

[Modem Butterfly]

5. He kidnapped and illegally imprisoned someone for the purpose of torture

This psycho should be in jail for the rest of his life.

[Alcibiades]

6. Not really

Even the plaintiffs don't make that allegation. In fact, the jury didn't render a verdict on the pistol-whipping charge.

www.splcenter.org/pdf/dynamic/legal/leiva_v_ranch_4th_am_pet.pdf

What happened to them does not qualify as torture. We've seen lots of real torture lately, and this isn't it. Assault, at the maximum.

[Modem Butterfly]

7. Mincing words doesn't make it okay

They hunted them down, surrounded them, held them against their will, beat them, used dogs to attack them, and intimidated them. The people who did this were psychopaths, plain and simple, using race and nationality as a convenient excuse.

[Alcibiades]

9. I'm not altogether certain

that the defendants made the claim that their actions were justifiable on racial grounds.

I'm not claiming that what the defendants did was "okay." The real outrage here, for me, anyway, are the inhuman conditions in Mexico, and much of the rest of Latin America, that make people, mainly poor, so desperate to come here, so they can suffer at the hands of traffickers in human misery and be exploited so that corporations can make more profit from cheap labor.

As for their putative psychopathology, are you qualified to make that diagnosis? None of the psychologists I know would be willing to render such a clinical judgment sight unseen.

Are you looking for villains on the border? I'll suggest a few:

* Elber Ruben Vazquez: A smuggler of human beings who allegedly stabbed a woman 60 times in Houston. thought to be in Mexico--if apprehended there, he won't be extradited to Texas, as he may face the death penalty.

* Osiel Cardenas Guillen and Joaquin Guzman, the two warring drug lords whose ongoing war has cost 130 people their lives so far this year, including 15 police and the city's police chief.

* The coyotes who bring people across illegally, without regard for their welfare: As of last week, 366 have been found dead, making this year a record already. Are the perpetrators of these offenses also pathological, or merely greedy?

So as I said, this guy's a jerk, but when we put him in the context of bad stuff that goes down on the border, he's not the worst offender by half. As a southerner, there's a certain tendency to look at all forms of evil as though they were the KKK--Europeans do the same thing, but with the Nazis. All evil is understood by way of analogy. Even when we put him into the category of the white southern vigilante, he doesn't measure up. Are we on a slippery slope to that kind of thing again? For me, that's the question this raises.

[Modem Butterfly]

10. Actually, that was you

$500,000 or $850,000 for a pistol-whipping committed against an illegal alien who was in the process of a criminal trespass?

You have a right to defend yourself in this country. You don't have a right to hunt down, kidnap, attack with dogs, threaten and beat people trespassers.

[Alcibiades]

13. No I didn't, except...

... to your mind. I'll explain further: "Illegal alien" here refers to a person committing a crime, and is not indicative of any particular race. I support this with the additional statement "who was in the process of a criminal trespass," which also refers to an act, rather than a racial status.

No one used the word race until you did: “The people who did this were psychopaths, plain and simple, using race and nationality as a convenient excuse.” I tried to clear you up on this score, noting that these defendants did not make the claim that race excused their actions. You then “corrected” me by citing comments that did not refer to race at all.

Finally, when I wrote "$500,000 or $850,000 for a pistol-whipping committed against an illegal alien who was in the process of a criminal trespass?" I had thought it was rather clear that what I was questioning was the amount of the awards, not the justice of the verdict.

Should I assume that when you object to one sentence out of an entire post by typing in the first snippet that comes to mind that you find the rest of it meets with your approval?

[Modem Butterfly]

16. You miss the larger point

People aren't allowed to hunt down, attack with dogs, imprison, threaten, and beat people who trespass on their land, illegal or not. These psychos should not be allowed to do this again.

I had thought it was rather clear that what I was questioning was the amount of the awards, not the justice of the verdict.

The amount of the award is part of justice. Once again, mincing words won't fly.

And just so you know, I think your attempt to excuse the award because of the nationality and race of the victims is pathetic.

[Alcibiades]

17. Perhaps you should consider

what you wrote:

"And just so you know, I think your attempt to excuse the award because of the nationality and race of the victims is pathetic."

It's rather typical of your mode of argument. Have I attempted to "excuse the award?" No--in fact, what I did was to call it into question. You meant something else, I presume, but this sloppiness on your part is typical of the mode of reasoning you've presented here.

Do you even know what the expression "to mince words" means? Look it up. You'll find I've minced no words. If what you really mean is "I refuse to be persuaded by an argument made up of words," then I agree. It appears that you do.

For the second time, I did not bring "nationality and race" into question. What I wrote earlier on the subject is perfectly clear, except to you.

Oh, and in case you deliberately missed the point again, let nothing I have written be taken to mean anything like an endorsement of hunting people down, attacking them with dogs, etc. I'm entirely against that. And pistol whipping.

[Modem Butterfly]

18. Semantics, semantics

I attempted to "excuse the award?" No--in fact, what I did was to call it into question.

For the second time, I did not bring "nationality and race" into question. What I wrote earlier on the subject is perfectly clear, except to you.


Translation: I didn't say what I said, and I didn't mean what I meant.

Granted, this guy's a jerk but it does not make the verdict fair. $500,000 or $850,000 for a pistol-whipping committed against an illegal alien who was in the process of a criminal trespass? That seems a bit steep. Heck, I'll go to Texas and get myself pistol-whipped if it's worth that much! And these fellows get to stay in the US!


Your Jedi powers won't work on us, sport. No one is falling for that "This isn't the post you want" bullshit. You were quite clear in what you said. You minimized what happened to these people, said the verdict was unfair, and tried to turn the emphasis to the nationality of the victims. You can attempt to re-phrase what you said all you want, but your original statement speaks for yourself. Volumes, in fact.

[Alcibiades]

20. You're awfully sensitive

It must be terribly difficult, looking for people/things at which to take offense. Your radar is so acutely tuned that it's as though NORAD regularly mistakes Canadian Geese for Soviet bombers.

I did write what I wrote, but it didn't mean what you thought it meant. I did minimize what happened to the victims. Sadly, their treatment at the hands of the vigilantes was probably the least harrowing part of their story, something I tried to bring attention to in earlier posts, but you were so busy looking for something to be offended at that you chose to overlook it because it's inconsistent with who you imagine me to be.

I didn't even mention the nationality of the victims that you claim I sought to "emphasize." Hell, I still don't even *know* the nationality of the victims myself.

No matter. You know "volumes" about me. Why am I even bothering to respond to you?

[Modem Butterfly]

22. Bingo. We've struck nerve, ladies and gentlemen!

:evilgrin:

[Alcibiades]

24. So your objective was to strike a nerve

by accusing me of racism. OK, you struck a nerve. It's a pretty cheap way to strike a nerve, though. I don't know any Democrats who don't get a bit bent out of shape when they are groundlessly accused of racism.

We could destroy the party in short order by going around accusing each other of racism, sexism and homophobia. If that's your task, then don't think I'm the only person who would object.

[Modem Butterfly]

26. No, that was just a side effect of being right

You descended awfully quickly into mouth-foaming. Not pretty, and not good. If you expect to be taken seriously, you'll need to get over that. You should probably also stick to what people have actually written, and not what you wish they had written. In other words, I didn't call you a racist.

We could destroy the party in short order by going around accusing each other of racism, sexism and homophobia. If that's your task, then don't think I'm the only person who would object.

More deflection. Why am I not surprised?

:eyes:

[Alcibiades]

28. It's not mouth foaming

But you're right. I have this tendency to write long responses. People tend to get bothered by that. These messages are not the greatest forum for that sort of style. Folks think it's long-winded and pompous, I suppose. I'm just not the sort of person who writes a post such as

Subject: Right on!

:kick:

and that's that, which is pretty close to saying nothing.

I'll admit I was insensitive. Maybe I'm just jealous. I don't own a ranch. I don't even own my own house. At the same time, I don't really get a lot of satisfaction from Mr. Nutzenhaus or whatever his name is getting his ranch taken from him.

[Richard Steele]

27. So, do you really BELIEVE what you are saying:

I refer to THIS:
"Sadly, their treatment at the hands of the vigilantes was probably the least harrowing part of their story"

I don't think anyone at THIS internet forum is gonna agree with you
on that one.

No one's buying it.

[Alcibiades]

29. See post #9

I had already mentioned this. No one on this Internet forum would think that "their treatment at the hands of the vigilantes was probably the least harrowing part of their story?"

I don't know why anyone wouldn't agree with me on this, unless it was because they didn't know the half of it. There was an excellent documentary on the Discovery Times Channel the other week (I forget the title, so I couldn't find it on their site-it may be on again) that documents the hardships of undocumented workers from Central America (I forget the country) as they journey through Mexico to the states. They get harassed by cops, ride on the tops of trains, risk dying of thirst in the desert, etc.

[Richard Steele]

30. I saw #9, and all the others as well. eom

[proud2BlibKansan]

8. I agree

I applaud this verdict. Maybe it will teach these assholes to stop taking the law into their own hands.

[ret5hd]

11. i'm in texas.

[Modem Butterfly]

12. .

:evilgrin:

[Alcibiades]

15. .

:applause:

[Alcibiades]

14. Goody for you!

And your point is?

[Modem Butterfly]

19. I think he's taking you up on your offer.

Heck, I'll go to Texas and get myself pistol-whipped if it's worth that much!

[Alcibiades]

21. Come and see the violence

inherent in the system! Help, help, I'm being repressed!

Such an offer is only good if he actually has $500,000+ that I can sue for. And a pistol.

[Modem Butterfly]

23. I'm sure he wouldn't have made it if he didn't

Just like you wouldn't have made your offer if you didn't intend to submit to a pistol-whipping.

[Alcibiades]

25. For $500,000

Those kids on the reality televison shows go through more for less.

:sarcasm:

[ret5hd]

31. i figured someone with the hutzpah to take a name like alcibiades...

would already be on his way down after an offer like that...$500,000 or no.

[Alcibiades]

32. Texas is a big place

I wouldn't head off without knowing where to go, just like I wouldn't head off to Persia without knowing where Cyrus was, or to Sicily without knowing where Syracuse was.

OK, maybe Sicily's a bad example, given what happened there!

And the $500,000 is key! Alcibiades is all about his own self-interest. No cash, no traumatic brain injury.