Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 14

[ChiMoHe]

Petition to Keep Ron Paul in the Debates

http://www.petitiononline.com/RPRNC08/petition.html

[KBCraig]

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Couple+won%27t+fight+verdict+of+tax+evasion&articleId=98a1f839-eddf-446b-b17c-93c05204b45c

Couple won't fight verdict of tax evasion

By KRISTEN SENZ
Union Leader Correspondent

HANOVER – Tax protesters Ed and Elaine Brown said in a radio interview yesterday they do not intend to appeal their convictions on federal tax evasion charges.

The Browns, for whom a judge filed a notice of appeal with the 1st Circuit Court of Appeals in Boston, said they have abandoned "man's law" and now follow only the rules and laws put forth in the Bible.

"We know there's a possibility that this will end badly and they will end up killing us," Elaine Brown told Terri Dudley, host of "Your Turn" on Hanover's WTSL AM 1400. "Maybe some of us will die, but that happens in every revolution."

The Browns, who sequestered themselves in their Plainfield home after a January jury trial, have said that if they leave, it will be either as free citizens or "in body bags." But whether they perish or not, Ed Brown said, he's confident the ordeal will have a positive ending.

"Only God knows the time frame," he said. "And no matter how it ends, it will be good. It doesn't matter. If they do something to us, they'll make martyrs out of us."

Ed Brown said the U.S. Supreme Court has refused to hear the couple's Petition for the Redress of Grievances, which stems from the federal court trial in Concord. During the trial, Judge Steven McAuliffe refused to allow the Browns to argue the legal basis for the charges against them.

"They don't follow their own rules, their own laws, unless it's to their advantage," Elaine Brown said during the radio show.

The couple has asked the federal government since 1994 to cite a law that requires average Americans to pay taxes on their wages.

"They have never done so, and the reason they have never done so is because no such law exists," Elaine Brown said.

The Browns haven't filed a federal income tax return since 1995.

During the interview with Dudley, a Lebanon city councilor, Ed Brown said Lebanon Police Chief Jim Alexander and the Lebanon "city fathers" ought to be "brought to justice."

"They need to go to jail," he said.

Dudley, who stressed throughout the interview her belief that people have a right to their own opinions, said nothing of her seat on the council and changed the subject.

After the show, Dudley, who has known the Browns for about 15 years, said she always keeps her role as a city councilor separate from her job as an interviewer on the radio.

In cooperation with federal agents, Lebanon police tricked the Browns into federal custody last May by telling Ed there was a problem at the couple's West Lebanon property, where Elaine once ran a successful dental practice and had Dudley as a patient.

Ed Brown said the city council should only collect enough money in taxes to "run the city." He said despite the increasing tax rate, all he gets for his property tax dollars in Lebanon is fire protection and a public works truck to plow the road, and "I could do that myself."

"Never once has the city of Lebanon or the town of Plainfield been willing to sit down and discuss these issues," he said.

Ed Brown said he also objects to paying taxes for education so that public schools can teach "communism and homosexuality."

The Browns reiterated that they could have cleared their name at any time by paying the taxes the government says they owe. It's not ego that keeps them holed up in their Plainfield home waiting for a potentially violent clash with government agents, they said.

"Nobody would be that stupid to get into this kind of pressure and anxiety every day" unless they were standing by something they truly believed, Ed Brown said.

Judge McAuliffe sentenced the couple in absentia to serve more than five years in prison. He also submitted paperwork for their appeal, but the Browns said they would take no further court action.

[Russell Kanning]

That is more like it.
The Brown's are rejecting laws made by men and the fed judge sent along their old appeal as if they still care about playing their silly court games.
They have experienced first hand how the government works and are rejecting that system.

[Dave Ridley]

I didnt know Leb P.D. had tricked them, only that they had been involved.

[Russell Kanning]

They will do just about anything ... won't they.
Government employees are the enemy.

[powerchuter]

They will do just about anything ... won't they.
Government employees are the enemy.

I agree that any "government" that isn't 100 percent voluntary is the enemy.  I do think, however, that the majority of "government" employees would do something else if they had the opportunity.  Not saying they can't just "quit" their "jobs" but the majority of them have a hard time walking away from good pay, good benefits, job security, and pension plans(all at the expense of the rest of us).  We need to continue to work on a good "model" here in New Hampshire to facilitate a peaceful transition(hey I can hope!).

And just in case anyone reading this isn't familiar with the Stanford Prison Experiment here is a link to the website (http://www.prisonexp.org/).

It's important to keep in mind the results of this experiment and, sadly, human nature...

[Kat Kanning]

Something that is voluntary can't be "government", by definition.

[JosephSHaas]

I didnt know Leb P.D. had tricked them, only that they had been involved.

David,

1. THE TRICK...That was a GREAT http://www.unionleader.com article by Kristen Senz in today's newspaper at page #__ with the link above to its website version, and especially where she writes that: "In cooperation with the federal agents, Lebanon police TRICKED the Browns into federal custody last May by telling Ed there was a problem at the couple's West Labanon property...." (emphasis ADDed).

2. ...WAS A "BALD FACED LIE". I had talked with Ed about this a while back, and just a few minutes ago too, when he reminded me that it was the Lebanon police that called him at 6:30 o'clock in the morning that there was water coming out of the building, hinting that either a water main or water tank had somehow broke. This was what is called a bald face lie http://archiver.rootsweb.com/th/read/WORDS/1998-10/0908795857  thanks to Deborah and Martin e-mail: inspmgr at mvp.net back in 1998 in reply to ris at cap.urenco.co.uk where they call it a "bare faced lie" in England.

3. TO FIRE POLICE OFFICER: _________. The archiver definition of this phrase meaning "without any shame" and shame defined as: A condition of dis-honor; see also http://www.answers.com/topic/bald-faced for: 1. Brash; undisguised: a bald-faced lie; + 2. Zoology: Having a white face or face markings.  So for the word "Brash" = saucy, meaning: piquant, from the OF piquer, of "to pierce". Then my summation is that the Lebanon Police Officer _____________ [to call the Records division of the Department on Monday, http://www.lebcity.com/City_Resources/police/lpdindex.htm at 448-1212 M-F 8:30am - 4:30pm] did "pierce the corporate veil" as they say, by out-performing his duty, or in other words as an outlaw himself for this: "a particularly egregious lie" http://www.everything2.com/index.pl?node_id=1016783 of extra-ordinary (in a bad sense).  Actually one of the "public officers whose powers and duties are prescribed by statute" according to the case of: Boody v. Watson, Vol. 68 N.H. REPORTS 162-211 @ page 195 (Dec. 1886) as cited in the Chase v. Schroth case #02-E-064 at the Merrimack Countty Superior Court, document no. 16 ORDER @ page #3. So Officer ___________ WHERE is it pre-scribed for you to lie?  Have you no shame? You are a disgrace and a great disappointment, that yes: needs to be dis-appointed.  THIS will be the second part or plank of my two-step platform for when I meet with your bosses, The City Council on Wed., June 6th '07 @ 6 PM, see: http://www.lebcity.com/ over to the forum, or direct path by way of: http://lebanon.myfastforum.org/sutra27.php#27 from http://lebanon.myfastforum.org/forum1.php

4. JOB DESCRIPTION OF THE COUNCIL.  http://www.lebcity.com/City_Resources/general.htm  "The City of Lebanon operates under a City Council/City Manager form of government.  A nine member City Council is elected for two year terms.  Elections are held the second Tuesday in March.  The City Council is responsible for establishing City POLICIES." (emphasis ADDed, as they CAN establish that SAME Sheriff's "policy" as out west where he has it in writing that the Feds "shall" or must show their chain-of-command BEFORE they enter his county, and I've been told, that ever since, not a single federal agent has been seen there, out in the tumbleweed country no doubt, but the principle the same, whether it be the prairie or the city, that of the Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 17 "Consent" factor in the U.S. Const. that does exist for N.H. BUT with the provisions that "shall" be complied with (by N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1) BEFORE they have jurisdictional authority! to operate, the operations BEFORE then (as the condition now withOUT those RSA 123:1 papers on file under oath) being MAL-practice by both the federal and local gov't goons for them to pay $monetary damages to their victims!

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

P.S. I've yet to receive the requested "incident report" of this raid from the IRS in Portsmouth, as indicated in my Reply #__ above to where I've directed my phone calls and letter to the Portsmouth Office to visit sometime next week. __

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of:

"The District Court of the United States        Concord, New Hampshire

Joseph S. Haas )
v.                   )       Docket # ____________
Unknown officer)

- - - - - - - - - - - PETITION FOR MANDAMUS - - - - - - - - - - -

--NOW COMES, the Petitioner: Haas, a citizen of the state of New Hampshire, and hereby petitions this court to compel WHOever that 'some officer of the United States' is as indicated in N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 by Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 17 U.S. Constitution* to: 'file...with the secretary of this state' of New Hampshire 'an accurate description and plan of the lands so owned and occupied, verified by' their oath.  This is a duty owed to the plaintiff and all citizens here for every such location within this state.

--A photocopy of the statute and certificate of non-compliance is attached hereto with a copy also from the http://www.defraudingamerica.com/crime_reporting_statute_right.html website where I did get this idea, plus: a copy of your 'OLD POST OFFC+CRT HSE' property card along with the L.O.B. History Page. [ withOUT any Book/Page reference to over at the Merrimack County Registry of Deeds]

--My visit to Sen. John E. Sununu's office in Nashua to find this officer has resulted in no reply, as yet of weeks ago now, with a copy herein to the United State's Attorney to represent him or her when found.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - -  Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, 603: 848-6059

Friday, May 18th, 2007 @ 3:10 o'clock p.m.

pc: The U.S. Attorney [Thomas P. Colantuono].

Also enclosed: My UNITED STATES POSTAL MONEY ORDER # 10434988282 in the amount of exactly: $1,000 (one thousand dollars) as an OVER-payment of the $350.00 filing fee, with change due me please, in accordance with the Coinage Act of 1792; see the http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mill_(currency) page for Mill (currency) and the bracketed section, plus footnote #1 of 2.

* Also enclosed: non-tax letter."

page 2 = http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/IX/123/123-1.htm
page 3= the RSA 1213:1 certificate of non-filing, dated: Sept. 10, 2001
page 4 = the defraudingamerica website by Rodney Stich stich at unfriendlyskies.com
page 5= the L.O.B. property card (front + back reduced to 65% for an 8.5x11" paper).
page 6= the L.O.B. History page. (see my Reply #__ above).
page 7 = photocopy of the UNITED STATES MONEY ORDER of March 5, 2007.
page 8= the wikipedia page for Mill currency.
page 9= the e-mail letter from City Solicitor, Paul Cavanaugh of Concord, N.H.

footnote #1: the receptionist took the PETITION with M.O. and talked back to Janice who replied that by (written or verbal "policy", as there is no rule #_______) they will NOT (but: not canNOT) take anything other than the exact $amount of the filing fee, said to be: $350.00 for a MANDAMUS, and that my answer to that was to appeal her decision to the Clerk James R. Starr.  So to await his decision in writing. My reply being on the way out: to send me the change, and in accordance with the law!

footnote #2: the reason for ft.nt#1 is that I have tried, by many telephone calls to the ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICE OF THE UNITED STATES COURTS @ 202: 502-2600 Attn: Jeffrey J. Larioni, Chief Office of Audit tried to get the Balance Sheet for THIS particular District Court of New Hampshire, (as for the $numbers for vending machine revenues, filing fees, etc. and expenses such as: lights, heat, court officers and employees salaries, those of the baliffs too plus Marshal and U.S. Attorney and staffs too, plus cost of supplies, and janitorial payroll + supplies, etc. but that the woman who promised to send this to me by e-mail after my telephone call of Tue., April 10'07 @ 10:54 a.m. WHOever was on duty answering the phone on that day and time LIED to me! as I never received it! resulting in my phone call earlier this week to a David Butler, REGIONAL Administrator for the 1st, 5th + 12th Districts at 202: 502-1570 telling me that they have NO Index for my name but that I can get these REGIONAL reports someWHERE over at their http://www.uscourts.gov website BUT that is NOT what my F.O.I.A. request was!  It was and is still for this AUDIT of N.H. in the SPECIFIC, and so to contact my Congressman or woman to get it!  BTW Did you notice Sununu's photo on the last page of section A in yesterday's http://www.unionleader.com ?  He can attend a DEAD Police Officer's funeral in Franconia, BUT has NO time to find out who that ALIVE Officer is that is required to file his oath here by RSA 123:1 - a request I did put in writing to his Nashua Office several weeks ago withOUT any reply!

pc: The Administrative Office of the United States Courts, One Columbus Circle, NE, Washington, D.C. 20544 Would you please provide me with this ANNUAL AUDIT REPORT specically for this District Court of the United States here in New Hampshire. Reference: The U.S. GOVERNMENT MANUAL, at the library.

[JosephSHaas]

They will do just about anything ... won't they.
Government employees are the enemy.

I agree that any "government" that isn't 100 percent voluntary is the enemy.  I do think, however, that the majority of "government" employees would do something else if they had the opportunity.  Not saying they can't just "quit" their "jobs" but the majority of them have a hard time walking away from good pay, good benefits, job security, and * * * * * pension plans * * * * * (all at the expense of the rest of us).  We need to continue to work on a good "model" here in New Hampshire to facilitate a peaceful transition(hey I can hope!).

And just in case anyone reading this isn't familiar with the Stanford Prison Experiment here is a link to the website (http://www.prisonexp.org/).

It's important to keep in mind the results of this experiment and, sadly, human nature...

P.C.:

--I've highlighted your * * * * * pension plans * * * * * part of your paragraph, and suggest that for New Hampshire, you read: Article 36, Part the First, N.H. Constitution & Bill of Rights. "Ecomony being a most essential virtue in all states, especially in a young one, NO pension SHALL be granted, but in consideration of actual services; and such pensions ought to be granted with great caution, by the legislature, and NEVER for more than one year at a time." June 2, 1784. (emphasis ADDed) To my knowledge there as NEVER been any such grants of individual pensions by the legislature in this or last century! that is required by "one year at a time." I think that they think this only applies to a YOUNG state and not now in its MIDDLE or OLD age? There being many retired public (non- or mal)servants who did WRONG during their time, and now needing to face the music! The music of the General Court being a good or bad tone upon them in their yea or nay votes on each and every one, and not as a group, especially when an Art. 32 Petition is against certain pentioners as collecting from a non-vote to begin with, but the statute of limitations going back only three (3) years.  Hey! Before the judges were added to the state-wide system in 200_ they were being paid for RSA Ch. _______ services rendered and "to be" rendered as the excuse they gave when I took the then State Treasurer, Michael Ablowich to Merrimack County Superior Court case #___ , and then found out that one Supreme: Maurice Bois was an Alzheimer's patient at a Manchester Home and being paid for "stand-by alert" to return to the bench past the age: 70 years limit in Art. 78, the Supremes declaring by their "opinion" that a temporary seat on the so-called "bench" was not an "office" and so them exempt from Article 78 Disqualification by Age. http://www.state.nh.us

--There's an Article 32 Petition signed by me and properly endorsed with (two former Reps, but who were Reps at the time of signing: Henry McElroy from Nashua, and Dick Marple, see below plus) Rep. Lars Christiansen's signature and District number from Hudson as by House Rule #36, with three amendments dealing with this Art. 36, but that the House Speaker, [Terie Norelli (d), Rockingham District 16, Seat #6001, 35 Middle Rd., Portsmouth, N.H. 03801-4802, 603: 436-9169, office: 271-3661 terie.norelli@leg.state.nh.us ] http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house refuses to process it by House Rule #4 over to the "appropriate committee" http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/abouthouse/houserules.htm and so for me to likewise charge her with RSA Ch. 643:1 "Official Oppression" http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LXII/643/643-1.htm  too, as I did against former House Speaker, Doug Scamman, with my complaint to the Attorney General's Office falling of deaf ears! The A.G.'s Office way overdue in getting back to me within the 120 days as by section II of: http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/rsa/html/LV/541-A/541-A-29.htm for RSA Ch. 541-A:29,II.

--My theory I have yet to prove is that "they"/ WHOever I complain against and to/ for action are ALL "on the take", from this $5 billion account, that's the letter "b" as in boy, not m as in million, because if they can get away with envelopes of greenbacks floating around the chamber of the Senate during key votes, that I've testified to before the House Judiciary Committee I think it was a few years ago, as eye-witnessed by former State Rep. Dick Marple of Hooksett, who finds this practice disgusting, and will tell ANYone of what he saw (and WHO took it?), then they can get away with "murder"! as in to shoot Ed Brown to shut him up for good for multi-billions of dollars at the national level! So Ed: keep up the good work.

--And speaking of "extortion", that's what the Supremes have just written into my Appeal # 2206-0783 last Friday, May 11th in that I would have had my questions answered by them for an Art. 14 "complete" and Art. 8 "account"ing but for the lack of the lower court papers out of the file, and this under what's supposed to be a "Unified Court System"! Unified alright, unified of THEM v.s. US, me calling Clerk Rbt. B. Muh at the Grafton County Superior Court in North Haverhill, N.H. 03774 at 787-6961 on Tuesday morning and his reply to me of Thu., May 17th @ 2:45 p.m. to get in my MOTION TO RECONSIDER (within 10 days and so by Mon., May 21st) as having the two (of three files) on this "Champerty" bullshit sent to the Supreme Court at a cost of 50-cents per page by Rule #__ (when Merrimack County Superior Court in Concord only charges 15-cents per page) = $617.50 (that would have been 1/3rd that = about $200+ plus that other "Criminal" file #92-S-562 to get that cost later; __).

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

pc: (1) House Speaker Norelli, (2) The Attorney General's Office, (3) The Supremes.

P.S. To call Norelli again at her house phone # to leave yet another message that SHE is the one to make the decisions, and NOT her legal counsel who LIED in his letter to me earlier this month that my Article 32 Petition was not filed in time.  Hey! I filed it BEFORE-time under Doug Scamman's mal-administration as House Speaker, and with the Amendments added thereto about 2 minutes BEFORE the Dec. __ 2006 deadline at the Room #__ Legislative Services, 1st floor State House & Capitol Bldg., #__ North Main Street, Attn: Jill who said that she'd process it, but when I contacted here after #__ amount of time, she said it was there to collect dust!

* And so now can you see WHY Ed has given up on the "system"?  It IS, or almost time for an Art. 10** Revolution!  The ends of government are perverted, and the means of redress are ineffectual, there needing just the second element to be complete if not already: "public liberty manifestly endangered".  Liberty defined as: "2. Freedom from confinement or SERVITUDE" (emphasis ADDed because by the Thirteenth Amendment: "Neither slavery nor involuntary servitude, except as a punishment for a crime whereof the party shall have been duly convicted, shall exist within the United States, or any place subject to their jurisdiction" my Dad once writing to then legal counsel Stephen E. Merrill for Gov. John H. Sununu that your son by contempt has been sentenced by judge, but not convicted by jury, and so not eligible for a pardon, since found out to be WRONG! as by the case law in my prior applications, and now getting to the gray area of yes: a jury trial but with evidence withheld by the judge! as in Ed's case) "1a. The condition of being free from restriction or control" and 1."b. The right to act as one chooses" From "THE AMERICAN ENGLISH DICTIONARY OF THE ENGLISH LANGUAGE" (c)1973 @ page 406. Thus to see what happens in Reps Hall Monday morning, May 21st on the MANDATORY Seat Belt Law proposed by HB #___ to be put on the books and enforced by LAW ENFORCEMENT Officers / the State Police, actually-turned Revenue Agents of the State, the fact being that a third of the force quite in the 1960s when they were told to not enforce the law/ meaning the Constitution, but the statutes placed on the books by the politicians! Dick Marple one of those Troopers who quit.

** Article 10, N.H. Const., Pt. 1 & Bill of Rights: So when these three elements are done, as in WELL done in my opinion, as NOW! then "the people MAY, and of right OUGHT to reform the old, or establish a NEW government.  [The government of Home Rule, or A Man's Home is his Castle, and if he sets foot outside the walls or boundaries and is attempted at being gunned down by federalies on state turf withOUT permission, then so be it for to re-pulse against the wrongful pulsers: the governor will be "responsible" for any and all deaths as by his Art. 41+51 powers for his failure and refusal to act, my complaint to the Personnel Office to halt his salary for non-performance of duty, yet to be acted upon, see my Reply #__ above). (emphasis ADDed).  And continued with the reason for establising a new government not of a Democracy or mob-rule by majority, in what is supposed to be an Art. IV, Section 4, U.S. Constitutional Republic as guaranteed to us by the rule of law, rather than the rule of men (arbitrary actions), which has turned into not an oligarchy, but a dulocracy (that word USED to be/ past tense, in BLACK'S LAW DICTIONARY) and is defined as when the servant (as in the "public" servant) so domineers over the master that he rules with an iron fist.  An Iron fist as in needing some REAL Dominations (now look up that word for the heirarchy of angels) and fire from the blacksmith's shop, in the meantime to be wary of missiles projected from said shop when the goons step closer with their Big Brother face ready for some bullets alright.  Bullets to their brains to be splattered on the pavement they walk since they fail to carry the tipstaff for which to aim at, instead replacing such with their mouth, getting one right in there, to the cranal cavity and give them a lesson they will soon forget! Mashed brains for their family supper! in that: "The doctrine of nonresistance against arbitrary power, and oppression, is absurd, slavish, and destructive of the good and happiness of mankind."

[powerchuter]

Something that is voluntary can't be "government", by definition.

A group of individuals could unanimously agree, amongst themselves...to the Non-Aggression Principle and the Golden Rule as their "governing" philosophy...

If they did this then what would you call their governing agreement?
They voluntarily agreed to govern themselves using self-government and the NAP and GR...

You know...
Like the Advocates for Self Government(http://www.theadvocates.org/)

[JosephSHaas]

Something that is voluntary can't be "government", by definition.

A *****group***** of individuals could unanimously agree, amongst themselves...to the Non-Aggression Principle and the Golden Rule as their "governing" philosophy...

If they did this then what would you call their governing agreement?
They voluntarily agreed to govern themselves using self-government and the NAP and GR...

You know...
Like the Advocates for Self Government(http://www.theadvocates.org/)

P.C.:

1. All I get is a "white-out" at that website.

2. Also, re: that *****group***** word highlighted by me again, I just called that 448-1212 phone number for the Lebanon Police, http://www.lebcity.com/City_Resources/police/lpdindex.htm and the woman answered: "Public Safety", me presuming it to be the SAME as the Police Dept. so kidding of: would you please transfer me to the Police? Her answer of this IS the Police, so me hinting that the word Safety and Police are not synonymous.  The "safety" word defined as" "Freedom from danger or injury" ["The American Heritage Dictionary" again (c)1973 @ page 620 for the English Language, but them somehow doing the George Orwellian "Nineteen Eighty Four" double-talk) .  Anyways I told her that I had read today's http://www.unionleader.com newspaper story of one of her officers who did "trick" Ed  into the water leak lie, her reply of that she remembers the incident, and that they had a Press Release on it, and that there is no one person who lied, but that it was a "group effort" she said.

3. And so then I called Elaine, and she said that it was the woman dispatcher who they talked to that morning when she called.  Thus putting the two together, my presumption is that the dispatcher was told to lie to the Browns by her boss? M. James Alexander, Chief of Police? or maybe Gary J. Smith, Deputy Police Chief? or both? and maybe more in the group of #___, Elaine saying the "conspiracy" word is right! We have got to find out ALL of WHO were involved and call for them to turn in their badges on the way out the door!

4. I did also just send an e-mail letter to the Lebanon City Manager, Gregg Mandsager at the e-mail address of: Manager at LebCity.com for to please put me in as Agenda item #__ for the next City Council Meeting on Wed., June 6th '07 @ 6:00 o'clock p.m.

Yours truly, - - Joe Haas

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of:

"The District Court of the United States        Concord, New Hampshire

Joseph S. Haas )
v.                   )       Docket # ____________
Unknown officer)

- - - - - - - - - - - PETITION FOR MANDAMUS - - - - - - - - - - -

--NOW COMES, the Petitioner: Haas, a citizen of the state of New Hampshire, and hereby petitions this court to compel WHOever that 'some officer of the United States' is as indicated in N.H. R.S.A. Ch. 123:1 by Art. I, Sec. 8, Cl. 17 U.S. Constitution* to: 'file...with the secretary of this state' of New Hampshire 'an accurate description and plan of the lands so owned and occupied, verified by' their oath.  This is a duty owed to the plaintiff and all citizens here for every such location within this state.

--A photocopy of....

--My visit to Sen. John E. Sununu's office ....

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - -  Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, 603: 848-6059....

pc: The U.S. Attorney [Thomas P. Colantuono].

Also enclosed: My UNITED STATES POSTAL MONEY ORDER # 10434988282 ....

page 7 = photocopy of the UNITED STATES MONEY ORDER of March 5, 2007.....

footnote #1: the receptionist took the PETITION with M.O. and talked back to Janice who replied that by (written or verbal "policy", as there is no rule #_______) (*)they will NOT (but: not canNOT) take anything other than the exact $amount of the filing fee, ....

footnote #2: the reason for ft.nt#1 is that ....

pc: The Administrative Office of the United States Courts, ....

Here's what I did receive in yesterday's mail:

"UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT OF NEW HAMPSHIRE, 55 PLEASANT STREET, ROOM 110, CONCORD, NEW HAMPSHIRE 03301-3941

OFFICE OF THE CLERK, James R. Starr, Clerk of Court

Telephone 603-225-1423                        May 18, 2007

Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, NH 03302-3842

Re: Petition for Mandamus and Accompanying Money Order

Dear Mr. Haas:

--I am writing in response to your above-referenced submission that you hand delivered to this court on this date.

--In the late afternoon of May 18, 2007, you hand delivered to the clerk's office a Petition for Mandamus, presented a postal money order in the amount of $1,000 to cover the filing fee of $350, and requested a refund of the amount in excess of the filing fee.  As you were informed by our intake staffers, both court policy and Local Rule 67.4 (*)prohibits the clerk's office from accepting payment in an amount in excess of the required filing fee and prohibits the immediate refund of any tender in excess of the required filing fee.  I do not construe the Coinage Act of 1792 as requiring that the clerk's office accept the form of payment offered in excess of the required filing fee.(**)  Because you departed the clerk's office after refused to accept the return of your Petition for Mandamus and accompanying postal money order, I have enclosed both your Petition and money order.

Sincerely, Daniel J. Lynch, Chief Deputy Clerk

DJL/ enclosures"

(*) For the record, I was never told this Rule # 67.4 by the "staffers". 

(**) Thus The Coinage Act of 1792 will be strictly enforced on not the receiving end FROM in a refund to me, but on my filing fee TO the court! WHERE can I obtain the lawful money? And so back to the Post Office to make my demands. A copy of this packet to the Acting Postmaster there later today, to get back to her maybe next week after she digests this material with legal counsel if need be to get to the coins in which to pay this filing fee in accordance with the law!  (***)

(***) The Coinage Act of 1792: "That the money of account of the United States shall be expressed in dollars...and that ALL accounts in the public offices (in-cluding the U.S. Post Office) and ALL proceedings in the COURTS of the United States SHALL be kept and had in conformity to this regulation." (emphasis ADDed for BOTH places and the mandatory word: "shall" as a must/ mandatory requirement). (****)

(****) There is NO excuse not to have the money! Thanks to http://www.google.com for 12 U.S.C. 414 the search engine used (*****) to go over to http://www.federalreserve.gov/generalinfo/fract/sect16.htm for The "FEDERAL RESERVE ACT SECTION 16 ---- Note Issues" where in #15 of 17 for "Gold Deposits" it reads that: "The Secretary of the Treasury is hereby authorized and directed to receive deposits of gold...for credit to its or his account...." meaning either "any Federal Reserve bank or Federal Reserve agent". 12 USC 467 [as indicated on page 4 of the Mon., April 30, 2007 document no. ___ in Docket #07-C-0147 in the Merrimack County Superior Court of my case against: The Town of Boscawen and CITIZENS BANK. Thus we do NOT have a "fiat" monetary system because the Secretary is DIRECTED to receive this, and BEFORE he can DEMAND by Treasury Orders (T.O.'s) that certain individuals PAY their taxes (note: of not applicable to the public-at-large beyond the federal government agent status, unless published in the CFR/ Code of Federal Regulations, which event has NEVER taken place) he SHALL, as my public servant, provide or serve me with the coin/money when the Federal Reserve Notes are un-redeemable as prohibited against by Title 12 U.S. Code Section 411 for their redeemabilty, as for the WHY there is a deposit placed of gold from which the coins can be made from that metal and exchanged in a sale of silver too in which to make the other coins in this bimetalism as needed for the state to comply with Art. I, Sec. 10 of the United States Constitution!

(*****) For to find out what used to be/ past tense on the web, see http://www.archive.org/ that automatically goes over to http://www.archive.org/index.php see also http://www.archive.org/web/web.php Plus: http://www.toonopedia.com/peabody.htm and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Internet_Archive (of San Francisco, CA). According to http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mr._Peabody the cartoonist is Ted Key(ser), born: Aug. 25, 1912, and the voices were: for Peabody: Bill Scott, 1920-85, and for Sherman: Walter Tetley, 1915-75, R.I.P. for this Jay Ward (1920-89) Production.

[Dave Ridley]

I finally got around to calling ed and asking him about that controversial "bloodline" comment that appeared in the Monitor in January.   I had not heard about it until last month.  I told him I was unable to do anything supportive of him until the issue was cleared up in his favor...

He denied saying it and told me he condemns the idea of dragging officials' families into this.  He said it would be "Luciferian" to do that.

I told him I'd take him at his word.

Then he put his priest on the phone and the gentleman talked my ear off about the apocrapha! 

[TackleTheWorld]

Then he put his priest on the phone and the gentleman talked my ear off about the apocrapha! 

Sounds like Sonny is back.    Time for another visit!