California,Government Driving Folks off Their Land
Channel: KillingTime
Date: 2014-04-19

Secretary Jewell Announces Two Solar Projects Approved in California, Nevada
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/info/newsroom/2014/February/Secretary_Jewell_Announces_Two_Solar_Projects_Approved_in_California__Nevada.html
go down the list to silver state
http://www.blm.gov/wo/st/en/prog/energy/renewable_energy/active_renewable_projects.html
http://www.blm.gov/pgdata/etc/medialib/blm/wo/MINERALS__REALTY__AND_RESOURCE_PROTECTION_/energy/priority_projects.Par.4003.Fil

 Uploaded on Aug 23, 2011

The Antelope Valley is a vast patch of desert on the outskirts of Los Angeles County, and a segment of the few rugged individualists who live out there increasingly are finding themselves the targets of armed raids from local code enforcement agents, who've assembled into task forces called Nuisance Abatement Teams (NATs).

The plight of the Valley's desert dwellers made regional headlines when county officials ordered the destruction of Phonehenge: a towering, colorful castle constructed out of telephone poles by retired phone technician Kim Fahey. Fahey was imprisoned and charged with several misdemeanors.

But Fahey is just one of many who've been targeted by the NATs, which were assembled at the request of County Supervisor Mike Antonovich in 2006. LA Weekly reporter Mars Melnicoff wrote an in-depth article in which she exposed the county's tactic of badgering residents with minor, but costly, code violations until they face little choice but to vacate the land altogether.

"They're picking on the the people who are the most defenseless and have the least resources," says Melnicoff.

Reason.tv collaborated with Melnicoff to talk with some of the NAT's targets, such as retired veteran Joey Gallo, who might face homelessness if he's forced to leave his house, and local pastor Oscar Castaneda, who says he's already given up the fight and is in the process of moving off the land he and his wife have lived on for 22 years. And, while Antonovich declined an interview, we did catch up with him at a public meeting in order to ask the big question at the center of all this: Why the sudden enforcement of these codes against people living in the middle of the desert, who seemingly are affecting no one?

Writer-Producers: Zach Weissmueller and Tim Cavanaugh. Associate Producer: Mars Melnicoff. Camera: Alex Manning and Weissmueller; edited by Weissmueller.

Approximately 9:48.

Music by Audionautix.com.

Visit Reason.tv for downloadable versions of this and all our videos, and subscribe to Reason.tv's YouTube Channel to receive automatic notification when new content is posted.

Mirror 
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yw3RiMdS7sE&list=PLSZ-Rehro9esXkgyGI3myn88Qbqoye5Mb&index=2

channel
https://www.youtube.com/user/ReasonTV/videos


These sub Contracted Thugs the BLM are actually a sub-corporation of UNITED STATES INCORPORATED, a private foreign owned off-shore corporation since its last incorporation in 1925, copyrighted, trademarked and registered in Puerto Rico).Under the Reorganization Act of Washington District of Columbia, by it's own private business charter, neither the BLM, nor any other federal/corporate agency has lawful/legal authority, jurisdiction or interstate nexus within the 50 state geographical landmass.
 BLM, is actually classified as an: "Agent of Foreign Principle", under the
 intergovernmental Personnel Act. In other words, they don't represent the Constitutional Republic or the interests of the American People but rather, a foreign owned principle i.e., the international banking/military corporate cartel of London City, England known as Crown Corporation as their supreme authority.
 This has been openly admitted and exposed through Supreme Court cases since and even before 1938.

The Federal Judge in this case, Lloyd D. George, has had many of his ruling's questioned as arbitrary and unlawful (even collusive with the prosecution) and is in a liberal organization's hall of shame for what they consider gross abuse of civil rights. The legal question is the constitutionality of the BLM's structure and the creation and application of the laws under which it operates. From what I can see the District court has refused to acknowledge that the multiple use mandate of the BLM is being ignored by that plaintiff and it's cause of action if flawed and false. This federal court is fundamentally a tool of federal power.