Flight 93 families want land seizure for 9/11 memorial
Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12

Thread: Flight 93 families want land seizure for 9/11 memorial

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    4,650

    Flight 93 families want land seizure for 9/11 memorial

    I admire their determination, but if the owner does not want to sell, then they should find somewhere else to build it. I know what the Constitution and the Supreme Court have said regarding eminent domain, but I believe that property owners should have the final say..

    Flight 93 families ask Bush to OK land seizure - Yahoo! News

    PHILADELPHIA Relatives of those who died aboard United Airlines Flight 93 want the Bush Administration to seize the land needed for a memorial where the plane crashed in Shanksville, Pa., in the 9/11 terrorist attacks.

    The Families of Flight 93 sent a letter earlier this month asking President George W. Bush to empower the Secretary of the Interior to take the land in dispute from a homeowner who had been in negotiations with the National Parks Service, said Patrick White, vice president of the families' organization.

    The group says ground must be broken early next year in time for a memorial to be build for the 10th anniversary of the crash in 2011.

    Svonavec Inc. owns one of the last large chunks of land needed for the 2,200-acre memorial, including the area where the plane crashed Sept. 11, 2001. Svonavec's treasurer Mike Svonavec has said the park service has not done enough to negotiate a deal.

    White said Svonavec has not been willing to negotiate, and called that unacceptable.

    "We've certainly sought to do this within in the process, following protocol as much as we possibly can," White said Saturday. "It has gotten to the point where we fear we'll lose significant momentum.

    "We have an administration that has been very supportive of this effort. We just wanted to make sure the president is aware of what the circumstances are. ... We just didn't want to get lost in the shuffle."

    In October, the National Park Service said it would use an independent appraiser to determine the value of 275 acres of land needed for the memorial. The NPS also said it could use eminent domain to acquire the plot if all else fails.

    Construction of a $58 million permanent memorial and national park is scheduled to begin in 2009.

    White, whose cousin Louis Nacke II died on Flight 93, said the group would favor Bush giving the interior secretary or director of park services the power to take the necessary steps to acquire the land before the administration leaves office in January.

    He said the families understand that the outgoing president has plenty to do in his final weeks in office. But White pledged that the group would carry its fight to the Obama Administration, if needed.

    "I think the rest of the family members and I feel there is no point at which we will stop," White said. "Whatever it takes. As long as it takes. Whoever it takes. To do anything less would be doing a disservice to those that we love."

    Flight 93 was en route from Newark, N.J., to San Francisco on Sept. 11, 2001, when it was diverted by hijackers. The official 9/11 Commission report said the hijackers crashed the plane as passengers tried to wrest control of the cockpit.
    Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both.

    Benjamin Franklin

  2.   
  3. #2
    Agree. All too often government seizing of property is abused and I believe it would be an abuse to take land from this owner for a memorial.
    "The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"
    -- George Washington

  4. #3
    boyzoi Guest

    Angry

    I empathize with the families and certainly feel that they have the right, if they want to, to build something to memorialize the people murdered in this cowardly act. Personnaly I think the site in NYC will pay homage to all; I did not wake up in Communist China, and I have never been a supporter of emminant domain. They do not have the right to demand that the government "seize" anothers land to satisfy their desires. I wonder what they would be saying if the situation were reversed and it was their land someone wanted to take?

  5. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Florida Panhandle
    Posts
    3,096

    unconstitutional

    Quote Originally Posted by boyzoi View Post
    I empathize with the families and certainly feel that they have the right, if they want to, to build something to memorialize the people murdered in this cowardly act. Personnaly I think the site in NYC will pay homage to all; I did not wake up in Communist China, and I have never been a supporter of emminant domain. They do not have the right to demand that the government "seize" anothers land to satisfy their desires. I wonder what they would be saying if the situation were reversed and it was their land someone wanted to take?
    The 4th amendment deals with unlawful search and seizure of property real or tangible. I guess that one is null and void as well.
    FESTUS
    IN OMNIA PARATUS

  6. #5
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Michigan
    Posts
    60
    Only if the government seizes everyone of the supporting families houses also. It is easy to say lets take someone else's land. Let's see how they like it.

    It would be nice if the owner let the land go but it is their land and this is still America isn't it?

  7. #6
    It is always easy to make the cause sound so noble.
    By faith Noah,being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear,prepared an ark to the saving of his house;by the which he condemned the world,and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith Heb.11:7

  8. #7
    While I think this is a noble cause I also think the landowner is getting screwed. First they offer them less than $1,000 per acre for the land. I don't know much about land prices in PA but that sure seems like less than market value for farm land in the Eastern US. Then they get another apprasial and refuse to release the results of that appraisal saying it didn't meet Federal standards. Why didn't it meet standards? Could it be because it was too high? Then the families put out lies on what they property owners are asking.

    I believe that the 4th amendment allows for the taking of property with just compensation and that is all the property owner is asking but it seems that some people aren't willing to provide it. I have been involved in these types of deals from both sides and often the property owner gets shafted royally unless they have some friends in high places. If the families want a memorial so bad then let the come up with the dough. Most of the time when a family want to put a gravestone marker up the family pays for it.

  9. #8
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,437
    Eminent domain is a demonstration of the fact that private property rights only exist when the government deems it convenient. It doesn't matter if the property owner is being offered $1 billion per acre - if they don't want to sell, they shouldn't be arm-twisted into a deal.
    Silent Running, by Mike and the Mechanics

  10. #9
    Without the power of eminent domain and to condemn property this country would be in a mess. There would be no Interstate highways, few roads, fewer airports, few power plants and transmission lines to deliver electricity. However that power can easily get abused and does at times. This is one of those times where I don't think it is for the public good and should not be used.

  11. #10
    Quote Originally Posted by FN1910 View Post
    Without the power of eminent domain and to condemn property this country would be in a mess. There would be no Interstate highways, few roads, fewer airports, few power plants and transmission lines to deliver electricity. However that power can easily get abused and does at times. This is one of those times where I don't think it is for the public good and should not be used.


    I agree.
    Colt Government Series 80 .45 ACP S&W Mod 586 6" .357 mag
    High Standard Crusader 3.5" 1911 .45 ACP Taurus PT 111 Mill Pro 9mm
    S&W Mod 10-6 4" hvy barrel .38 spcl Stag AR-15 .223 or 5.56 mm

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Tags for this Thread

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Quantcast