It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Bars vs. Banks: Revolt declared against eminent domain

page: 1
5

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:26 PM
link   
My summary of the following youtube clip:

Freddy's Bar (corner of Dean Street and 6th Avenue, Brooklyn, NYC, USA) has been declared one of the best bars in the nation by Esquire Magazine. But that's not stopping the seizure of the property using the long-despised Law of eminent domain. Patrons have staked out a spot in front of the bar and created a guillotine out of beer cans.

The bar is not in foreclosure. Rather, it is being taken by the governement with "due compensation" under the eminent domain law in order to make way for some kind of new development project that supposedly will invogorate the economy. The bar and the entire neighborhood is scheduled to be leveled to be replaced with a stadium named after Barclays' bank and a soon-to-Russian-owned basketball team, as well as ACORN-operated housing.

"We are preparing for a very real siege. They will come with bulldozers and they will come with marshalls. And the neighborhood will stand, because this law has got to be stopped here and now," says one of the protestors.

"Today we are taking a big step. So far we have worked within the law, but our enemies have bought the law and turned it against us," says another.

The protestors are attempting to raise money to buy steel armor they hope to use to plate the bar, as well as neighborhood homes that are slated to be torn down under the law.





[edit on 1/11/10 by silent thunder]




posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
That is just WRONG!


To alot of people, their favorite bar IS "home"!


I doubt these guys win.

Keep us posted on the outcome,will you?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 10:50 PM
link   
NY standing up . . .

I like it.

I hope the neighborhood gives em hell



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:19 PM
link   
Well, I recall reading something a couple of years ago where families were forced to move from their homes because a company wanted to build a very large store of some sort on the property. The homeowners fought this eminent domain crap in court and lost. The judge deemed it for the good of the community, seeing as how the property taxes would increase greatly, thus income to the community's government, by forcing the homeowners to sell and then having businesses on the property. Yep, it's all good for the public cuz of the increase in taxes, which we all know, benefit everyone. puke puke.

Really is disgusting, ain't it?



posted on Jan, 11 2010 @ 11:55 PM
link   
reply to post by silent thunder
 


It's amazing that after all the rights our govt has taken from us since 9-11 and the way they are spending us into insolvency, it is a BAR CLOSING that gets this group to wake up and protest against govt over reaching.


I see threads all the time asking what it would take for us to riot/revolt/fight back. I guess now we know. Don't mess with the 'ole watering hole!



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by FortAnthem
 


There's actually alot of truth to what you just wrote. People can be pushed and held down quite easily, it seems, until their vices start getting affected. This is my theory on why the various state and even federal governments are actively considering legalizing marijuana right now. They realize that by permitting the people another vice (a certain to be heavily taxed vice), they will not only bring in more money to their ponzi scheme, but will also gain even more leeway before the people start pushing back.



posted on Jan, 12 2010 @ 06:56 PM
link   
Remember also, it's not just the bar being grabbed -- its community houses -- even when they are NOT in foreclosure!

Not too long ago the same thing happened in a Connecticut community: people were forced out of their homes and given "fair market value" (in a depressed economy, of course) for their land, so the land could be developed for whatever "positive" purpose. Then the banks changed their minds, and now that area is just a flattened, bulldozed land.

This law is wrong.




top topics



 
5

log in

join