Here is a fascinating take on it all:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P772Eb63qIY&e

Every place in Eastern North America had an original Indian name. Just as Keene was Ashuelot, and Hampton was Winnacunnet, Montreal was Hochelaga

Your point is well taken but that's not what I actually had in mind when I wrote about eminent domain. I was thinking about here in New England where land was granted and subdivided into small parcels in the 1600s, 1700s, and 1800s, and then railroads were formed in the mid-late 1800s and crossed hundreds of small existing parcels of land to travel between any two major cities. They "negotiated" with landowners with both parties knowing that the land would be taken (with some compensation) if they did not sell out. Same thing with highways in the 20th century.

Regarding the government eliminating a race of people and steallng their land, it happened right here in New England. At the risk of making Zeus vomit, I will briefly repeat that all or most of "our" land was taken from the Indians by the 17th and 18th century English and/or colonial governments and given (sometimes for a token price) to our predecessors in title.

When it comes to railroads, I might appreciate the benefits that were gained by the government giving land to rail companies so they could cross the country, but that doesn't mean I approve of the American government virtually eliminating a race of people and stealing their land just so goods could travel freely from one coast to another. I am married to a Native American and have a native American brother-in-law who might take issue with your assertion that the government has done a lot on their behalf by allocating land to the rail companies.

Anyway, Fred, you know Ian's stance on property rights and property damage. Had you told Tarzan that, Ian wouldn't have had to call back. If you're going to refute their position on things, you have to show you know it.

However, kudos on halfway defending Ian and Mark later on over prison sentences etc.