Man Freed After Driving Into Minuteman Protesters

A man arrested when his car hit two protesters at a speech by the founder of a civilian border-patrol group was free Thursday, but five demonstrators were behind bars, police said.

Harold Edmund Netkin, 69, was initially handcuffed Wednesday night, but was later released without being cited, said Garden Grove Police Lt. Mike Handfield.

Netkin's car was surrounded as he arrived at the Garden Grove Women's Club, 9501 Chapman Ave., and demonstrators rocked the vehicle and banged on it, Handfield said.

"We determined it was reasonable for him to move forward," Handfield said.

Two people who were standing in front of Netkin's car fell down when he moved forward, the sergeant said. One complained of knee and shoulder pain and was taken to a local hospital, he said.

According to broadcast reports, the other also went to the hospital.

Police were aware of the demonstration and had five dozen officers on scene "expecting to keep the peace," Handfield said. But some of the estimated 300 demonstrators were there "not to protest but to commit criminal acts," he said.

"A small contingent of people that were troublemakers had backpacks filled with full cans of soda that they were throwing and also cans filled with marbles that they threw," Handfield said.

Some of the protesters wore rubber gloves and donned sweatshirt hoods pulled tightly so only a small portion of their faces could be seen, he said.

Those arrested were identified by police as Hugo Sarmiento Vanlid, 24, Ivan Obed Silva, 26, Shane William Sparks, 21, Fernando Chirino, 23, and Kurt Takeshi Isobe, 18.

Their cities of residence were not immediately available.

"The case will go to the district attorney, who will have the opportunity to look at all the facts we did," Handfield said.

Prosecutors will look at the actions of both Netkin and the arrested protesters, he added.

About 300 people were outside the club as Minuteman Project founder James W. Gilchrist talked to about the same number of people inside, attendees said.

Handfield said some protesters went inside the meeting and appeared to be using cell phones to communicate with those outside.

"It got out of control in terms of protesters getting violent," he said.

Jan Tucker, chair of the California Association of Licensed Investigators, said he accompanied state and local leaders of the League of United Latin American Citizens to the talk.

He said the atmosphere inside the meeting "was the flip side" of what was happening outside.

"It was extremist inside," Tucker said. "The audience was so hostile inside we were afraid to ask questions."

Attendees who were not members of the club were charged $5 and reportedly had to write down their names, addresses and telephone numbers to get inside.

Tucker said he was not disruptive, but was still asked to leave. After refusing, an officer came over and spoke to him, but Tucker said he still plans to sue the California Coalition for Immigration Reform for allegedly violating his rights "because they tried to get me arrested."

Gilchrist spoke for about 90 minutes, blaming high housing costs and low wages on illegal immigration. He was presented with a cake for his earlier border monitoring, Tucker said.

Tucker said members of LULAC were outside demonstrating, but were strictly cautioned to remain non-violent and to refrain from provoking police.

Tucker said none of the people he spoke to after the event mentioned that Netkin's van was surrounded or was being hit, but insisted that he gunned the car at people.

Handfield said protesters broke a car window of "some innocent person coming to listen" to the talk. Police did not witness the vandalism, and no arrest was made.

At about 10 p.m., officers declared an illegal assembly, ordering the crowd to disperse.

The group, which recently patrolled a portion of the U.S.-Mexico border in Arizona, has announced plans to patrol a portion of the border in California on Aug. 1.

The Minuteman Project has been accused of racism. Gilchrist has denied the charge, saying his group merely wants to stop illegal immigration.

The group has drawn praise from Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, but its members were referred to as vigilantes by President George W. Bush.

Video: Minuteman Protest

Images: Minuteman Protest

Like my friend farmfriend, I post at both FR and CP under the same screen name.

CP is like most forums. It consists of different factions. Some of the folks there are AFers (anti-FReepers). Some are not. They range from conservative to center right, with a few moderates thrown in.. Some are religious, some are not. They have Catholics, Protestants, Jews, agnostics, atheists, and who knows what else. Some are nice. Some are hard on the outside but kind if you get to know them. Some of them are outright assholes. Just like most forums.

What ties these people at CP together is their desire to expose kooks. They go after kooks on both the right and the left, but their primary target is kooks on the right because those kooks make us all look bad and therefore undermine our progress. However, there is no consensus among CP folks as to who is a kook and who isn't.

I'll give myself as an example. I'm a conservative with some libertarian views. I tend toward Judaism but I have not yet converted. I am very much pro-Free Republic. I really like a lot of the posters here at FR. I even run a South Park ping list here. Most of the kooks I go after are on Liberty Post. My main disagreements with FR have been over their banning policy and the arbitrary policies of some, but not all, of the mods. For instance, I didn't like it when they banned two of my pals, Chancellor Palpatine and Sabertooth and I don't always agree with them when they move or pull my posts. But these things happen at ALL forums, not just FR.

As for why I hang out at CP, well many of the people I like hang out only at CP. Also, there are certain things I can say at CP that I can't say here. But once again, ALL forums have their taboos, and that includes CP.

Very well said, ES. : )

It's funny...being a part of the WPPFF*, and supportive of the MMP (though I support Bush on almost everything else) left me pretty much an enemy of management and ~95% of the people here.

I love a good debate, but fighting just stresses me out. Get enough stress in RL. ; )

At CP and my other forums, the conflicting positions are still there, but aren't as nearly as brutal to deal with. For one thing, they're not usually radical about things, and they're (mostly) types who know good people, even friends, can honestly and politely disagree.

But also, I think there's more personal accountability by both members and leadership, due to their smaller size. So, the inevitable jerk here and there usually doesn't last too long. Everyone knows well and considers each "source". ; )

I never paid enough attention to FR business history, or particular personalities here, to make big public judgments about the other stuff. I assume if there are defenses to be made about anyone or anything, they can and should be made to those threads by those who do.

Anyway, that's my 2 cents, FWIW...

*obligatory caveat: I didn't want her tube pulled. I had very serious problems with the way it was handled. I just wanted the vitriol and lies to stop.

I like the three people that you mentioned.

I don't have a real problem with Delay. I'm sure he's not perfect but overall he does his job quite well, thank you.

I like Ann but sometimes I find her comments to be irresponsible. For example, her famous "convert them to Christianity" comment. Her fans either say she meant it tongue in cheek or they belligerently say, "so what." I have read the article several times. Maybe she did mean it tongue in cheek but I really cannot tell. During the Terri Schiavo affair, Ann, the constitutional lawyer, advocated executive action by the Bush brothers (send in the cops or troops to kidnap Terri), despite the fact that such action would have been illegal and would have gotten them impeached and removed from office. When she makes this and other comments, her fans say, "Well, we get what she's saying but you don't." That's silly. What productive thing has been accomplished if your comments are so esoteric that they can be understood by fans only?

I love Rush. Sometimes he annoys me but no big deal. I have been aware of the existence of anti-Rush conservatives for more than a decade. I first noticed them on the old Compostserve Issues Forum where Rush had his own section. I really don't know what their motivation* is.

*
Image Hosted by ImageShack.us
Okay. So I lied.

Do you stand by the posts you made below?

http://clownposse.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4491&whichpage=1

"Luis, you are forgetting that Jim Rob has held himself up to be a political activism site. There are rules for that. I'm guessing he has stepped over the government drawn line several times. This might be a good line of investigation for those interested. Has he broken any lobbying rules etc. Contacting the FPPC here in CA and the federal equivalent would be the first step. Maybe the IRS as well?

That day they went to DC and visited offices, I'd bet money no paperwork was filed with the powers that be."

http://clownposse.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4491&whichpage=2

"Posters here are simply pointing out that those donating are being taken to the cleaners by a dishonest person. I think most have voted with their feet. I'm one of the few who continue to post on FR. I don't donate. I openly admit that I am using the site to my advatage for as long as it continues or I have need. I'm more honest about what I'm doing than JR is."

http://clownposse.org/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=4491&whichpage=3

"Seems worthy of an investigation. I keep saying that to different things but no one seems to have the time to look into it. I guess that is the difference between people who earn a living and people who grift for a living"

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.