Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

* Town Leaders Oppose Seizing Justice Souter's Home *

Expand Messages
  • victoryusa@jail4judges.org
    J.A.I.L. News Journal ______________________________________________________ Los Angeles, California July 24,
    Message 1 of 1 , Jul 24, 2005
      J.A.I.L. News Journal
      Los Angeles, California                                                  July 24, 2005
      Mission Statement                  JNJ Library                     PayPal Support
      Federal J.A.I.L.                           FAQs                    What?MeWarden?
      Talk of Proposed Recall of Town Leaders Opposed To Seizure of Justice Souter's Home For Hotel


      Souter-home campaign targets pols
      Justice's town leaders oppose effort to seize property

      Posted: July 22, 2005
      6:33 p.m. Eastern

      © 2005 WorldNetDaily.com

      An advertising entrepreneur leading an effort to seize David Souter's home in response to the high court's controversial eminent domain decision is encouraging citizens to mount a campaign against leaders of the justice's New Hampshire town.

      Logan Darrow Clements said today on "Joseph Farah's WorldNetDaily RadioActive" program that the five members of the board of selectmen of Weare, N.H., rejected his proposal to take Souter's property, prompting a call for their removal from office.

      Clements wrote to the board, explaining he needed to find out if they already opposed the proposal so he would know whether it was worth the money and effort to produce a formal presentation.

      Selectman Joseph Fiala replied, saying in conclusion, "While I understand your frustration with the offending decision of the Court, I hope you will reconsider your position and take one I'm sure you are more comfortable with – that is to defend the property rights of all citizens, whether we agree with them or not. Peace, Joe Fiala, Weare Selectman"

      But Clements contends Fiala doesn't understand that in taking that position, he is giving Souter special rights.

      The Los Angeles entrepreneur is encouraging people to write to the selectman board members "and explain that giving Mr. Souter a special exemption from his own ruling is not defending property rights, as they are trying to assert."

      "Equal justice under the law means we all are treated equally," he said.

      Clements said he's asking the residents of Weare to continue with a ballot-initiative drive to circumvent the board and to investigate whether local laws allow them to remove the entire board of selectmen from office.

      "America now needs the assistance of the residents of Weare so that the torch of liberty can enlighten one who has so soundly turned his back on all those who died to keep it lit," Clements says on his website.

      The town of Weare has been inundated with calls in support of the proposal since WND first publicized the story of how Clements plans to turn eminent domain against one of its champions.

      Clements says he's received more than 5,000 e-mails and over 400 phone calls.

      The U.S. Supreme Court ruled 5-4 two weeks ago that local towns and cities can seize homes and private businesses through eminent domain and turn the properties over to private developers for no other reason than the fact that it would result in higher tax revenues for the municipality.

      A few days after the ruling, Clements faxed a request to Chip Meany, the code enforcement officer of Weare, seeking to start the application process to build a hotel on 34 Cilley Hill Road, the present location of Souter's home.

      Clements wants to build "The Lost Liberty Hotel" on the property as a kind of museum commemorating the lost right to private property in America.

      The Kelo v. City of New London decision allows the New London, Conn., government to seize the homes and businesses of residents to facilitate the building of an office complex that would provide economic benefits to the area and more tax revenue to the city.

      Though the practice of eminent domain is provided for in the Fifth Amendment of the Constitution, the case is significant because the seizure is for private development and not for "public use," such as a highway or bridge. The decision has been roundly criticized by property-rights activists and limited-government commentators.

      J.A.I.L.- Judicial Accountability Initiative Law - www.jail4judges.org
      Contribute to J.A.I.L. at P.O. Box 207, N. Hollywood, CA 91603
      See our active flash, http://www.jail4judges.org/national_001.htm
      JAIL is a unique addition to our form of gov't. heretofore unrealized.
      JAIL is powerful! JAIL is dynamic! JAIL is America's ONLY hope!
      E-Group sign on at http://groups.yahoo.com/group/jail4judges/join
      Get involved at JAIL_SALE_USA-subscribe@yahoogroups.com
      To be added or removed, write to VictoryUSA@...
      "..it does not require a majority to prevail, but rather an irate, tireless
      minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.." - Samuel Adams
      "There are a thousand hacking at the branches of evil to one who is
      striking at the root."                         -- Henry David Thoreau    <><

    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.