Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 31

Thread: U.S. Takes Land For Sept. 11 Memorial

  1. #1
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,052

    U.S. Takes Land For Sept. 11 Memorial

    This is BS!! Just cause a plane crashed on your land the Govt can just come in to take it and put up a Memorial?? WTF??!

    I sure hope the owners are fighting this... I mean I understand the purpose and the reason but it would seem to me that the Govt isn't offering up the full amount of money the land owner wants which they should just take some from the GM hole and give them for it vs taking it.. bad PR IMO!

    The National Park Service says it will begin taking land for the Flight 93 memorial in western Pennsylvania from property owners because negotiations have proven unsuccessful.

    The service says it will condemn about 500 acres still needed for the memorial to be built in time for the 10th anniversary of the 2001 terrorist attacks.

    The park service planned to publicly release further details later Thursday.

    Flight 93 was traveling from Newark, N.J., to San Francisco when it was diverted by hijackers with the likely goal of crashing it into the White House or Capitol. The official 9/11 Commission report said the hijackers crashed the plane into a Pennsylvania field as passengers tried to wrest control of the cockpit.
    http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/...ome;topStories

  2. #2
    Second Most EVIL YARDofSTUF's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    69,990
    500 acres?

    Just what we need, another memorial.

  3. #3
    SG DC Team Member Paft's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Location
    Charlottesville, VA
    Posts
    5,736
    What is it... Eminent Domain? The law where the government can step in and take land paying some nominal fee and the owners can't do jack **** about it...

    Craptastic.

  4. #4
    R.I.P. 2018-07-16 RoundEye's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2000
    Location
    In a dry but moldy New Orleans, Louisiana
    Posts
    18,219
    Even Wal-Mart has gotten into this Eminent Domain nonsense.

    Wal-Mart, the Abuse of Eminent Domain and Corporate Welfare
    Sliding down the banister of life ..........................

  5. #5
    Senior Member Gixxer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Posts
    9,471
    what in the hell do they need 500 acres for. are they building a strip mall for a memorial?
    a.k.a. GSXR 750

  6. #6
    Certified SG Addict
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    29,514
    The NWO must build its shrines of worship, don'tcha know?

    What we NEED a memorial for is our constitution, rights, and rule of law, the victims of 9/11 with the most far-reaching influence.

  7. #7
    Imperial Impotentate brembo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2001
    Location
    crawlspaces
    Posts
    18,725
    Quote Originally Posted by Paft View Post
    What is it... Eminent Domain? The law where the government can step in and take land paying some nominal fee and the owners can't do jack **** about it...

    Craptastic.

    Yeah, ED (heh) at it's best. Tho a few cases of late have been shot down by various supreme courts.

    ED is a useful tool sometimes, it's SUPPOSED to be used to prevent one or two people frrom hindering the advance of important public infrastructure (I.E. highways, dams, bridges...things that benefit society as a whole). As I see this project the land in question kinda needs to be at or near the site of the plane impact, so thats one aspect in favor of the gov't. However I do not see how a memorial can be argued as overly important to society as a whole. To my view it's gross misuse of power.
    Tao_Jones Cult Member since 2004
    I gave Miss Manners a Dirty Sanchez, and she LIKED it.

  8. #8
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,052
    They are still going after it.. you even have a family member wanting to take land from people that couldn't control a plane landing on their land.

    The amount of land alone for this memorial is insane! I hope the land owners fight it and win... if its true that the people on that plane were fighting for their freedom then they lost the second the Govt takes land away from people for this purpose.

    A chain link fence now stands between Tim Lambert's land and the impact site of United Airlines Flight 93, which crashed here on September 11, 2001. The property has been in Lambert's family for almost 80 years.

    My grandfather purchased about 200 acres in the 1930s, and he would cut timber and sell the timber off, and he would build cabins as well," Lambert says. "That's how he got the family through the Depression."

    Lambert says he had no plans for the land, he just knew he wanted to hold on to it. "There's a lot of natural resources in this area -- natural gas, coal," he says.

    That all changed the day 40 passengers and crew died trying to take control of a Boeing 757 that had been hijacked by four terrorists as it took off from Newark, New Jersey, bound for San Francisco, California. It is believed the hijackers had intended crash the plane into the White House or the U.S. Capitol.

    Plans for a permanent memorial have been in the works for years. Congress passed a law in 2002 instructing the National Park Service to establish a national memorial where the crash occurred. Part of it would be on Lambert's land.

    In the seven years since, some of the most important land needed for the massive project has remained in limbo, producing an emotional debate among landowners, family members and the National Park Service.
    The amount of land needed for the memorial is just over 2,200 acres, about 1,400 of which is near the crash site, where there will be a visitor center. The other 800 acres would create a buffer around the site to protect the rural setting.
    For Patrick White, vice president of Families of Flight 93, this project is a labor of love. White's cousin, Louis Nacke, was killed on United Flight 93. White is leading the effort to acquire all the land needed for the memorial.

    "We're creating a place where the 40 heroes of Flight 93 can be revered and remembered," White said from his law office in Naples, Florida.

    White says the negotiations with landowners has been challenging and supports the governments use of eminent domain.

    "No one has ever questioned that there is a public purpose to these lands'" White says. "Their purpose became public the minute that those private citizens' lives and remains became part of those lands."
    http://www.cnn.com/2009/POLITICS/05/...ute/index.html

  9. #9
    Advanced Member ARS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Panhandle, FL
    Posts
    916
    I cannot believe (yeah I can) that the government is trying this. And I cannot believe more people are not protesting, throwing their hands in the air about this.

    I still think our constitutional rights are slowly fading (you'll like that comment Burke)

    But it is true. Down to guns, to the this bs preventive detention, the list goes on...
    *sigh*

  10. #10
    Advanced Member ARS's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Panhandle, FL
    Posts
    916
    Curiosity... how big are the memorials for the soldiers who died in-battle? Over seas? etc?

    I know someone here can locate it.

  11. #11
    Disciple of Doom SeedOfChaos's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2000
    Location
    Comfortably Numb
    Posts
    8,651
    I think I can help with the question on memorials overseas, there are two US WWII memorials around my area that I know of.

    The memorials here are considerably smaller. Just across the border to Belgium there's a memorial for I believe US airforce service men who died defending a bridge over the Prince Albert Canal, somewhat close to Eben Emael, if that rings a bell. This memorial is tiny, more or less a large rock with a plaque on it, if I remember correctly.

    Then there's a large US military cemetary (looks much like Arlington, just smaller - rows upon rows of crosses) plus a visitor and memorial center. Wikipedia has an article on it. It was built near the Dutch village of Margraten in rememberance of 8,301 dead and 1,722 missing US soldiers. It covers 65.5 acres.

    For further comparison, here's a list on Wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/America...nts_Commission

    Oh yeah, and Arlington National Cemetary is 624 acres, says Wiki. So 2,200 acres seems excessive indeed.
    Last edited by SeedOfChaos; 05-30-09 at 08:01 AM.
    ex-WoW-addict

  12. #12
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,052
    who's going to fund it? The National D-Day Memorial is running out of money and may shut down.

    BEDFORD, Va. (AP) -- The president of the National D-Day Memorial foundation says it may be forced to close the memorial.

    William McIntosh said Thursday the memorial needs an infusion of cash or a new owner.

    He says the memorial's big problem is a lack of donations, due to the economy. The memorial gets about $600,000 a year from visitors, but counts on donations for another $1.6 million annually.

    The memorial honors the Allied invasion of Nazi-occupied France during World War II. The invasion was the largest land, air and sea operation in military history.
    http://www.wdbj7.com/Global/story.as...43676&nav=S6aK

    Makes no sense to me to put up another memorial on private lands when they can't even keep others they have open running.

  13. #13
    R.I.P. 2013-11-22 blebs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    North Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    12,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Gixxer View Post
    what in the hell do they need 500 acres for. are they building a strip mall for a memorial?
    My feelings are that there is some missing pieces to the puzzle and the government wants to make damn sure no one finds it. I still don't buy that the passengers rushed the jackers. I believe that aircraft was shot down.
    Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces people into thinking they can't lose. -Bill Gates

  14. #14
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,052
    Quote Originally Posted by blebs View Post
    My feelings are that there is some missing pieces to the puzzle and the government wants to make damn sure no one finds it. I still don't buy that the passengers rushed the jackers. I believe that aircraft was shot down.
    the shot down idea would mix with the article and the guy who's land they want to take he keeps finding pcs of wire all over the place vs a crash into what didn't show a big hole.

    Lambert still finds debris from the plane on his land.

    "Red and blue wire all over the place," he says as he bends over to pick up a piece. "Here it is almost eight years later."

  15. #15
    R.I.P. 2013-11-22 blebs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    North Canton, Ohio
    Posts
    12,819
    Quote Originally Posted by Sava700 View Post
    the shot down idea would mix with the article and the guy who's land they want to take he keeps finding pcs of wire all over the place vs a crash into what didn't show a big hole.
    I truly believe they did shoot it down and then concocted the BS story trying to make the passengers look brave and hide the truth. I can certainly understand the reasoning for shooting it down, but why the cover up?
    Success is a lousy teacher. It seduces people into thinking they can't lose. -Bill Gates

  16. #16
    Moderator Roody's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2000
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    30,761
    What makes you think it was shot down blebs?

  17. #17
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,935
    Quote Originally Posted by Roody View Post
    What makes you think it was shot down blebs?


    My info all comes from the government and the 9/11 Commission Report.

    At 9:40am, the FAA halts all air traffic. All Flights are ordered to land at the nearest airport. Exception..military aircraft.

    At 10:03, Flight 93 crashes

    Here is what bothers me the most and this is from my own independent research...

    http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/...54/detail.html

    SHANKSVILLE, Pa. -- Hoping to dispel rumors that United Airlines Flight 93 might have been shot down by military aircraft, the FBI Saturday said that two other planes were in the area but had nothing to do with the hijacked flight crashing in western Pennsylvania. The FBI said that a civilian business jet flying to Johnstown was within 20 miles of the low-flying airliner, but at an altitude of 37,000 feet.That plane was asked to descend to 5,000 feet -- an unusual maneuver -- to help locate the crash site for responding emergency crews.

    The FBI said that is probably why some witnesses say they saw another plane in the sky shortly after Flight 93 crashed at 10:10 a.m. Tuesday in a grassy field near Shanksville, about 80 miles southeast of Pittsburgh.The FBI said there was also a C-130 military cargo aircraft about 17 miles away that saw smoke or dust near the crash site, but that plane wasn't armed and had no role in the crash. That plane was flying at 24,000 feet.


    So why is a civilian business jet flying around 23 minutes after it's given the order to land at the nearest airport and then at 10:03, it's given the order to help locate the crash site of Flight 93?

    The 9/11 Commission Report confirms a military aircraft was in the vicinity of the Flight 93 crash site but that it was a C-130. It makes no mention of a civilian business jet that the FBI reported.


    I won't mention the 10:10 am flight crash in the news report because it can't be substantiated. Also, the portion about the farmer in his plane 45 minutes after the crash, after all Air Traffic in North America was halted...wow, just wow.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  18. #18
    NYC Newbie Slayer Prey521's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Humble, Tx
    Posts
    34,934
    Quote Originally Posted by blebs View Post
    I truly believe they did shoot it down and then concocted the BS story trying to make the passengers look brave and hide the truth. I can certainly understand the reasoning for shooting it down, but why the cover up?
    Why NOT cover it up? While most would understand shooting it down, it's still something that I would not expect them to admitting to, and rightfully so.
    Have your feelings been hurt by a random act of E-Thuggery? If so, call 1-800-Waaaaahmbulance, we're here 24 hrs a day, 7 days a week, to take your call, you could be due a large monetary settlement, don't delay, call now.

    "Please be careful prior to entering the world wide web, the internet is serious business"


  19. #19
    Maneater JawZ's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2001
    Posts
    21,935
    Quote Originally Posted by JBrazen View Post
    Why NOT cover it up? While most would understand shooting it down, it's still something that I would not expect them to admitting to, and rightfully so.

    I firmly believe the passengers revolted...in addition to other government action. They are still heroes.

    ...formerly the omnipotent UOD

  20. #20
    Ohh Hell yeah.. Sava700's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2002
    Location
    Somewhere
    Posts
    24,052
    If not shot down and it hit the ground you would have a hole somewhat dug out from the impact and you wouldn't have pcs of wiring from the plane being found over this guys land which is spread all over the place. Nope you would have it pretty much in a general location where it is said to have crashed.

    I believe it was shot down at the last min while perhaps the passengers attempted to do something. At any account no matter what the reason they have no right to take these people's land they own. The Govt doesn't have the money to pay for a memorial just for the pure reason I gave up above that they can't afford the ones they already have.

Similar Threads

  1. U.S. Obtains New Evidence of Iranian Nuclear Intrigue
    By Gixxer in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 01-16-09, 11:26 AM
  2. Poll finds support for Obama's war views
    By Roody in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-16-08, 09:27 AM
  3. Iraq's Cabinet approves U.S. security pact
    By Roody in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-16-08, 08:00 AM
  4. Some young U.S. Muslims approve suicide hits
    By Roody in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 340
    Last Post: 05-29-07, 08:23 AM
  5. U.S. airstrike targets al-Qaida in Somalia
    By Roody in forum General Discussion Board
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 01-09-07, 06:47 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

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