Woke-Mob California Dems Steal Land And Gives It To Blacks?? WTF!

[irosie91]

It's their land..they can do as they please~

I note that you don't address why the land was taken in the first place..that .they did not want to sell it to the Govt.--who were being pressured by the white landowners to put the blacks in their place..that place not being enjoying the beachfront they owned--in full view of those full of hate. This story also does not enumerate the KKK assaults and vandalism.

do you have details not available to us? -----can you cite evidence of that "white landowner
pressure" ?

 

[irosie91]

for the record-----there is lots of eminent domain confiscation in the USA----
should there be an investigation as to just how squeaky clean were the many
events?

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ungrateful people is what they are.
At the very bottom of the story "I know the first thing we are going to do is sue for reformation for 96 years of revenue loss".

So it isn't enough they are going to be GIVEN land worth $75,000,000???!! Nooo... they are going to sue the very people giving it to them also.
These people deserve nothing but the land, and that is debatable.
Land seizure has happened all over the world in every country you can think of. If America was to give back land it seized over the past 243 years... there would be little "America" left.
But look at these greedy bastards. Not enough to be given back land only because they are black, no appreciation for that whatsoever. They want more. **** them... I wouldn't give them a damn thing

 

[badger2]

Good deal! Rightfully so.
But I thought you pinkos hated inheritance?

One need not be pinko to understand stick-and-carrot pathologies of inheritance.

 

[toobfreak]

It's their land..they can do as they please~

Who? The family? No, it is not their land. It was taken lawfully under eminent domain and they were compensated for it. Happens all the time. All of this is just a big show to try to score brownie points with black people.

I note that you don't address why the land was taken in the first place..

What does it matter?

that .they did not want to sell it to the Govt.--who were being pressured by the white landowners to put the blacks in their place..that place not being enjoying the beachfront they owned--in full view of those full of hate. This story also does not enumerate the KKK assaults and vandalism.

All true but immaterial. The motives may have been racial at the time but the city has the power to take land for public use and they did---- reason not withstanding. I note that the land is undeveloped. You can bet that had the city built a 500 million dollar beachfront resort and hotel there, they would NOT be returning the land.

But don't worry, the land will be resold again and this time some rich white developer will be sure to exploit it.

 

[westwall]

The city council took the land under eminent domain laws as is quite customary. Happens to a lot of people. And the family received compensation for it, $14,000 which was equal today to about $224,000. So the land was not "stolen." What I don't understand is why the land is not being SOLD back to the descendants? Offering to sell the land back, $75 millions worth, for only a quarter million is a very good deal. The irony is that now having given the lanoud back, the family is apt to eventually sell it again anyway, to some rich, white interest.

Possibly, and good for them. The eminent domain law was fraudulently used. Thus the land WAS stolen.

 

[toobfreak]

Possibly, and good for them. The eminent domain law was fraudulently used. Thus the land WAS stolen.

Now you're rationalizing. I hate eminent domain. IMO it is all theft. It should only be used in critical situations where there is no choice, like building a bridge or a highway the region sorely needs and there is no other way to do it without using your property. Clearly, that was not the case here.

And too often, fair compensation is never given. If anything, the family ought to be compensated handsomely to make up for the trauma of having your home taken from you against your will.

But nothing never earned is ever appreciated and this family did not earn the property back, it was just gifted to them after also being paid for it. I predict no good will come from the gain other than their selling the land and making an immediate huge windfall-- -- -- kind of like the George Floyd family who are now multi-millionaires, all for nothing other than their son was a career hood who chose to counterfeit at the the right place and time.

So lets carry all this magnanimity over to the American Indian. Their land was stolen and NEVER compensated for!

Let's be fair and give the Indians back:

1. Long Island.
2. Florida.
3. South Dakota.
4. Arizona.
5. California.

And while we are at it, we should give back Texas and the SW back to Mexico.

 

[westwall]

Now you're rationalizing. I hate eminent domain. IMO it is all theft. It should only be used in critical situations where there is no choice, like building a bridge or a highway the region sorely needs and there is no other way to do it without using your property. Clearly, that was not the case here.

And too often, fair compensation is never given. If anything, the family ought to be compensated handsomely to make up for the trauma of having your home taken from you against your will.

But nothing never earned is ever appreciated and this family did not earn the property back, it was just gifted to them after also being paid for it. I predict no good will come from the gain other than their selling the land and making an immediate huge windfall-- -- -- kind of like the George Floyd family who are now multi-millionaires, all for nothing other than their son was a career hood who chose to counterfeit at the the right place and time.

So lets carry all this magnanimity over to the American Indian. Their land was stolen and NEVER compensated for!

Let's be fair and give the Indians back:

1. Long Island.
2. Florida.
3. South Dakota.
4. Arizona.
5. California.

And while we are at it, we should give back Texas and the SW back to Mexico.

I rationalized nothing. Eminent domain laws provide a means to take land from private people to HELP the community.

The stated reason was to build a park. A park that was never built. Thus the premise for the ED action was false, which means it was an ILLEGAL TAKING.

Look up illegal taking and that will help you out.

 

[toobfreak]

I rationalized nothing. Eminent domain laws provide a means to take land from private people to HELP the community.

In other words, some bureaucrat decides they can make better use of YOUR land than you can even though it isn't their land to decide.

The stated reason was to build a park. A park that was never built. Thus the premise for the ED action was false, which means it was an ILLEGAL TAKING.

No, it was a legal taking, but taken for racist reasons. Unless you can show me something in the law that states that the reason for taking the land has to be a GOOD one or they MUST follow through with the stated or intended development otherwise the deal rescinds back to the original owner. Clearly here, they only intended to bumfuck this family for being black, so the return is a good thing, but the people who were actually wronged are long dead and the family now getting the windfall are being gifted for no actual loss of their own, for all we know, had the land never been taken, something else might have been done with it in the intervening years! So like Floyd, this is far from a perfect solution. Just like another toppled confederate statue.

So, lessee-- -- -- what about the American Indians getting some of their land back or fair compensation? What would you say the land of America is worth anyway? About 600 trillion?

How about this: the Indians collect 10% of all taxes collected skimmed right off the top.

 

[Bootney Lee Farnsworth]

LA County officials will return a beach property worth millions nearly 100 years after it was seized from a Black family

Willa and Charles Bruce were among the first Black landowners in Manhattan Beach, where they created a resort as a "sanctuary" for Black residents.

www.insider.com

"It's been a challenge for years to reobtain the beachfront property seized from Charles and Willa Bruce — a couple who purchased land in Manhattan Beach, California and created a "sanctuary" for Black residents to enjoy the beach amid racial discrimination in the early 1900s. Bruce's Beach Lodge faced intimidation from white residents and the Ku Klux Klan, but the couple didn't back down, Shepard said. The property was eventually taken from the family in 1924 by the city council, which used eminent domain under the guise of building a park. It remained untouched for years.

The land today has been estimated by historians and city officials to be worth approximately $75 million, a substantial fortune that subsequent generations of the Bruce family have missed out on. Officials released a report earlier this month detailing steps to return the property, including evaluating the land's value and certifying the property's legal heirs. The county board of supervisors on July 13 voted in favor of moving forward with the plan."

How are these people able to get away with this?? Why is the state returning land that it rightfully took from some people who really didn't matter anyway? This is a result of all of that cancel-culture-woke-mob-critical race theory crap...they are basically going to go from place to place; taking land from whites and giving it to a bunch of blacks who have no rightful stake or claim to that land. It's time to fight back, it's time to bring back red-lining, whatever tool we can use to return things back to its rightful place.

What's funny is your attempt to be douchy backfired.

 

[westwall]

In other words, some bureaucrat decides they can make better use of YOUR land than you can even though it isn't their land to decide.


No, it was a legal taking, but taken for racist reasons. Unless you can show me something in the law that states that the reason for taking the land has to be a GOOD one or they MUST follow through with the stated or intended development otherwise the deal rescinds back to the original owner. Clearly here, they only intended to bumfuck this family for being black, so the return is a good thing, but the people who were actually wronged are long dead and the family now getting the windfall are being gifted for no actual loss of their own, for all we know, had the land never been taken, something else might have been done with it in the intervening years! So like Floyd, this is far from a perfect solution. Just like another toppled confederate statue.

So, lessee-- -- -- what about the American Indians getting some of their land back or fair compensation? What would you say the land of America is worth anyway? About 600 trillion?

How about this: the Indians collect 10% of all taxes collected skimmed right off the top.

No, once the park wasn't built, it became an illegal taking. Look up Eminent Domain. It REQUIRES that the land is taken for a public good.

Those laws have been twisted to saying that they can take land from poor people, to give to rich people who promise to develop the land to increase property tax revenues.

It's wrong, but they do it all of the time, and even the Supreme Court ruled that it was OK which is one of the worst decisions they ever made.

 

[Burgermeister]

This generally feels right, but were there other properties taken from white people for that park? I don't know. It just seems odd that they only needed to exercise eminent domain for that one plot.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

does everyone who lost land to EMINENT domain issues GET IT BACK 100 years later?

The way you phrased it, "does everyone" implies that "someone" had it happen to them in the past.

 

[irosie91]

The way you phrased it, "does everyone" implies that "someone" had it happen to them in the past.

"had it happen" ? you mean lost to eminent domain? ------Lots of people lost land, homes,
and businesses--------even in my own little family

 

[Confederate Soldier]

"had it happen" ? you mean lost to eminent domain? ------Lots of people lost land, homes,
and businesses--------even in my own little family

Lost it, then had it given back many years later.

 

[irosie91]

Lost it, then had it given back many years later.

no, just lost it------speaking of which----did you ever hear of Sheikh Jarrah?

 

[Confederate Soldier]

no, just lost it------speaking of which----did you ever hear of Sheikh Jarrah?

That's not what the original statement was about - I know what eminent domain is.


As for the land dispute in Israel, land taken over by battle is not the same as eminent domain, and should not be treated as such.

 

[irosie91]

That's not what the original statement was about - I know what eminent domain is.


As for the land dispute in Israel, land taken over by battle is not the same as eminent domain, and should not be treated as such.

could you expand on that idea? What land are you describing as "taken over by battle"?
with reference to SHEIKH JARRAH?

 

[Confederate Soldier]

could you expand on that idea? What land are you describing as "taken over by battle"?
with reference to SHEIKH JARRAH?

I am only familiar with the name as being land in Palestine or something, Forgive me for not studying specific middle eastern geography...

By the idea of "land taken over in battle" I mean this. In ancient times, when the Romans conquered everything, were separate countries seen as separate and independent? No, it was all considered a part of Rome. The same way for Greece. If an army takes over a land, and claims it as their own, and has people moving in there and living, it is now the conquerors land. The original inhabitants have two choices; fight back and take back the land, or accept the loss. They cannot call it their own and have no control over it.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

In a nation however, it is different. A nations government cannot take over private property without good reason, and in this case, the government did not do anything with the property. So the government did not keep its promise, so they gave it back as they should have.