In the US, the "owners" of this house would have been dragged out by the cops at gunpoint long before this stage of construction.
more details please
Ping!!!
First, the Chinese will have to take it away from the Peoples Republic of Obama.................
I’m gonna go out on a limb and say this is bunk.
To amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide for the administration of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge. (Introduced in House)
HR 169 IH
111th CONGRESS
1st Session H. R. 169 To amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide for the administration of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge.
IN THE HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
January 6, 2009 Mr. SALAZAR introduced the following bill; which was referred to the Committee on Natural Resources
A BILL To amend the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act of 2000 to explain the purpose and provide for the administration of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge.
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. PURPOSE AND MANAGEMENT OF THE BACA NATIONAL WILDLIFE REFUGE.
Section 6 of the Great Sand Dunes National Park and Preserve Act of 2000 (16 U.S.C. 410hhh-4) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)--
(A) by striking `(a) Establishment- (1) When' and inserting the following:
`(a) Establishment and Purpose-
`(1) ESTABLISHMENT-
`(A) IN GENERAL- When';
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking `(2) Such establishment' and inserting the following:
`(B) EFFECTIVE DATE- The establishment of the refuge under subparagraph (A)'; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
`(2) PURPOSE- The purpose of the Baca National Wildlife Refuge shall be to restore, enhance, and maintain wetland, upland, riparian, and other habitats for native wildlife, plant, and fish species in the San Luis Valley.';
(2) in subsection (c)--
(A) by striking `The Secretary' and inserting the following:
`(1) IN GENERAL- The Secretary'; and
(B) by adding at the end the following:
`(2) REQUIREMENTS- In administering the Baca National Wildlife Refuge, the Secretary shall, to the maximum extent practicable--
`(A) emphasize migratory bird conservation; and
`(B) take into consideration the role of the Refuge in broader landscape conservation efforts.'; and
(3) in subsection (d)--
(A) in paragraph (1), by striking `and' at the end;
(B) in paragraph (2), by striking the period at the end and inserting `; and'; and
(C) by adding at the end the following:
`(3) use decreed water rights on the Refuge in approximately the same manner that the water rights have been used historically.'.
Sounds like an email hoax to me.
Can't win.
My friend Tim says this is true and he can verify it, but he might be yanking my chain.
This comes up now and again.
I’m not particularly concerned.
Even if the story is 100% true, were they to actually try to carry out the eviction/foreclosure/condemnation, it would probably pose unanticipated difficulties.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2196426/posts?page=31#31
Not only that, but they were able to name all the VPs at Bank of America yesterday, and Steinbrenner sold them the Yankees!
“Can anyone verify this?”
No. But I can say that it would be unconstitutional if he did. Eminent domain does not give the right of foreclosure anyway. The government has still got to compensate you even if it takes your land.
Are you in the market for a bridge? ;-)
OMG!
THEY’RE COMING TO TAKE ALL THEIR WAL-MART STUFF BACK! QUICK, HIDE THE $49.99 PLASTIC PATIO SET!
Yawn. This again?
It would’nt surprise you would it?
Just to put it out there, no one can own or claim land until they put an 18 year old with a rifle on it. I just don’t see it happening.