Main thread for Ed and Elaine Brown vs the evil IRS, Part 21

[JosephSHaas]

From the UL:

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Browns%27+support+takes+hit&articleId=b3ad77fc-dccf-4ab2-9ade-8deee403324f

Browns' support takes hit

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CONCORD – Some hard-core supporters of Ed and Elaine Brown, who were convicted of tax evasion and have refused to turn themselves in, are now keeping their distance.

In the more than six months since the Browns, holed up in their Plainfield home, were convicted, they have hosted an ever-changing cast of supporters from across the country.

Some relationships have come to a bitter end: The Browns have squabbled with bloggers, radio hosts, and several spokesmen and assistants...

Doug Kenline,(*) a blogger who set up a Web site dedicated to news about the Browns and who interviewed them for audio Webcasts, was shunned by Ed Brown; Brown had learned that Kenline's wages were being taken by the IRS to cover unpaid back taxes, according to a published report.

"I'm not talking anymore to people who aren't going to stand up for the lawful laws of this land," Brown said in an Internet recording of the conversation in which the two parted ways. "People can be slaves, and I'm not going to associate with them anymore." ...

The Browns still have supporters, however, including Jim Hobbs of Phoenix, who lives in a trailer on the property and helps screen visitors, and Danny Riley of Albany, N.Y., who was arrested and detained by marshals in June after he stumbled on a surveillance unit while walking the couple's dog.

U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, who is charged with arresting the Browns, said Tuesday that his office is continuing to investigate those who aid and abet them. So far, the marshals have not charged any supporters with crimes, he said.

(*) Over at http://www.google.com for "Doug Kenline" I found at http://irsemails2.blogspot.com that back in 2003 the I.R.S. liened his Bank of America (savings or checking?) bank account and that he asked the bank of what law gave them the power to do that of the lien, and to fork over the $money.  Did Kenline tell the bank that if they/ the bank do not see the OMB # on the IRS form that the bank "may" treat it as bootleg?  And if so, did the bank fork it over anyway?  [OMB= Office of Management & Budget].

I asked one bank in Concord, N.H. (The Bank of New Hampshire, bought out by TD BankNorth, where Rep. Dick Marple of Hooksett, Retired, had over $5000 stolen from his bank account there by the IRS) a few years ago, if they'd be "consumer friendly" and turn this "may" condition into a must/ shall, or mandatory burden upon the IRS to prove themselves, but the bank refused, saying from the attorney at their Maine headquarters, by verbal say-so over the phone to me in their Concord branch office that they take each I.R.S. request on a case-by-case basis of course to "churn the account" at the bank, for more of an expense, as paid for by the depositors and whose stockholders don't seem to care about the O.M.B. law since they make enough from their dividends already.  Maybe some bank will do this and have vast $sums migrate to their offices. And to start by maybe becoming a stockholder of #___ N.H. banks, go to their annual meetings, and vote in officers with guts! *

Plus did Kenline find his own state's http://www.constitution.org/juris/fjur/1fj-ba.htm papers and shove the non-filing for Georgia back in the face of both the I.R.S. and the bank?  He lives in Atlanta, as Douglas S. Kenline with an e-mail of dkenline at bellsouth.net to get a copy of this posting for maybe a reply to here of like Paul Harvey says for us to get: "The Rest of the Story."

So now with the current situation of Kenline's employer sending the I.R.S. ___% of his paycheck, is this being done from a direct request of the Feds to this private company?  (Or indirectly by some court order?) And since he's not fighting it? he's now a "slave" who Ed doesn't want to associate with?

Yours truly, Joe Haas

* To find out how many #___ banks are stock-holder owned in New Hampshire, as many, with only two 'Mutual" Banks that I know of that are actually owned by the depositors (Laconia Savings Bank, and Merrimack County Savings Bank), and see how much a single share costs $_____ then go to the meetings to get this policy in writing of it being super consumer-friendly AGAINST the I.R.S. Yeah! To see WHERE there's a N.H. office (306 of them nationwide) for http://www.scottrade.com/ that requires just $500.00 to start an account and charges only $7.00 per trade "regardless of the number of shares you trade."

Modification: Update: The only office in the state is at 987 Elm Street, Manchester, N.H. 03101-1807 Tel. 603: 622-9501, 1-888-834-1980 across the street from the New Hampshire Plaza.  I just spoke with Nora there who added that to get the actual stock certificate out of the account is: $50.00 each.  The good old days of like buying the single share for $15.00 (minimum three stocks for a $45.00 broker fee) are over, it looks like, and I hear that many companies are doing away with stock certificates altogether, so maybe for the artwork, a good investment might be to buy the canceled ones at your local antique store for like $5.00 each. My neighbor says the train ones are worth more.

[coffeeseven]

That story came off the wire. Interesting. Not a right angle in it, but interesting.

[error]

The AP article was based on Margot Sanger-Katz's latest:

Browns shake up entourage

Tax-resisting couple recruit allies and then alienate them

By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff
August 22. 2007 12:30AM

In the more than six months since Ed Brown and, later, Elaine Brown have holed up in their castle-like home in Plainfield, they've succeeded in first recruiting and then driving out an ever-changing cast of supporters from across the country.

First, there was Bill Miller, the ex-military exercise trainer who dubbed the Browns' siege the "Little Alamo" and told friends that Brown was "worth more to me dead than alive."

Next, came "Anthony" of Binghamton, N.Y., who went by the online handle "Peace" and created a MySpace page for Ed Brown (and later his wife, Elaine), complete with a wish list asking friends to donate machine guns and body armor.

Then, there was Cirino Gonzalez of Alice, Texas, a former military contractor and weapons expert who brought a 50-caliber rifle, served as the couple's security officer and posted long, incoherent online messages on the couple's behalf.

Those hardcore supporters spent weeks with the couple, who were convicted of tax-related crimes and have refused to surrender to authorities. They helped guide the Browns' communication with news media and supporters. They brought weapons and logistical advice. In some cases, they shopped and cooked for the couple.
   
But none has lasted long. Miller left the house in February, Anthony in March, and Gonzalez in late June.

U.S. Marshal Stephen Monier, who is charged with arresting the couple, said yesterday that his office is continuing to investigate those who aid and abet the Browns. So far, the marshals have not charged any supporters with crimes.

"This whole thing is a continuing investigation," he said.

Last week, Miller distributed an e-mailed "press release" clarifying his unwillingness to continue to support the Browns.

"I do hereby officially state that I am not to be known as a 'supporter,' nor associate of Edward-Lewis:Brown," the letter says.

"Brown has ignored, on many occasions throughout the years, the good council (sic) of some valiant, focused, hard-working freedom fighters whom, unfortunately, exemplify a larger spiritual vision, and a more finely tuned sense of balance and reason than does Brown," it explains.

Gonzalez was another supporter to leave recently. According to an internet posting by his father, Jose Gonzalez, Ed Brown pushed out his longtime aide after Jose Gonzalez and another one of his sons, a Texas police officer, visited the couple and offered some criticisms of their security plan.

"I found him to be an arrogant, ambitious, self-serving man that is using everyone around him (including Elaine) for his own personal political gain," the posting said. On his own MySpace page, Cirino Gonzalez acknowledged that he was asked to leave.

In the case of Doug Kenline, a blogger who set up a widely read website dedicated to Brown-related news and who interviewed the Browns daily for audio webcasts, Ed Brown rejected him after learning that Kenline's wages were being taken by the IRS to cover unpaid back taxes.

"I'm not talking any more to people who aren't going to stand up for the lawful laws of this land," Brown said in an internet recording of the conversation in which the two parted ways. "People can be slaves, and I'm not going to associate with them any more."

Brown also ejected Dave Ridley, a Keene member of the Free State Project who was organizing pro-Brown demonstrations across the state and sending updates on the situation to the news media. Brown told Ridley to leave, Ridley said, in part because he disagreed with Ridley's pacifist views.

Mark Potok of the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks militias and tax protest groups, said it's not surprising that Ed Brown has repeatedly clashed with his supporters. He said leaders in right-wing fringe groups typically fight among themselves as much as they agree on their common enemies. Potok knew Ed Brown when he was a leader of a local militia in the early 1990s, but Potok has not spoken to him in many years.

"The people who wind up in these situations are people with incredibly stubborn personalities and gigantic egos, and I think that's clearly the case here," he said.

The Browns' newest helpers are Jim Hobbs of Phoenix, who lives in a trailer on the property and helps screen visitors, and Danny Riley of Albany, N.Y., who was arrested and detained by marshals in June, after he stumbled on a surveillance unit while walking the couple's dog.

Yesterday, Riley and a supporter in Illinois issued a fundraising request, asking supporters to send money through the internet transfer service Paypal or by sending personal checks, money orders and cashier's checks. All the money will go to the Brown house, the request said.

"I just got a foreclosure warning on our house, but I'm going to send a few dollars that way," wrote a supporter with the MySpace handle "Jennifer," on the couple's page. "I support their cause, and it'd be foolish not to send the money. I sure hope it helps."

------ End of article

By MARGOT SANGER-KATZ

Monitor staff

[JosephSHaas]

The AP article was based on Margot Sanger-Katz's latest:

Browns shake up entourage

Tax-resisting couple recruit allies and then alienate them

By Margot Sanger-Katz
Monitor staff
August 22. 2007 12:30AM

...
In the case of Doug Kenline, a blogger who set up a widely read website dedicated to Brown-related news and who interviewed the Browns daily for audio webcasts, Ed Brown rejected(*) him after learning that Kenline's wages were being taken by the IRS to cover unpaid back taxes.

"I'm not talking any more to people who aren't going to stand up for the lawful laws of this land," Brown said in an internet recording of the conversation in which the two parted ways(**). "People can be slaves, and I'm not going to associate with them any more." ...

Mark Potok of the Anti-Defamation League, which tracks militias and tax protest groups, said it's not surprising that Ed Brown has repeatedly clashed with his supporters. He said leaders in right-wing fringe groups typically fight among themselves as much as they agree on their common enemies. Potok knew Ed Brown when he was a leader of a local militia in the early 1990s, but Potok has not spoken to him in many years.

"The people who wind up in these situations are people with incredibly stubborn personalities and gigantic egos, and I think that's clearly the case here," he said.

------ End of article

By MARGOT SANGER-KATZ

Monitor staff

Thanks Beavis.  But there seems to be something missing here.  Ed (*) "rejected" Kenline because he is a victim?  I don't think so.  Then in the next paragraph, Margo says (**) that "the two parted ways", meaning what? To attack the I.R.S. from different angles? Then she quotes Ed not talking in the singular to Kenline, but all "People" in the plural.  So we can assume, or read between the lines that Ed has included Kenline in that group of "slave" people?

Plus did Margo get this exact quote from Potok directly?  Did she call him or did he call her?  If the latter, it is he who has the bloated ego, as he is what I call a one-way streeter, with proof in my phone calls to him leaving messages that are never returned to either my phone, e-mail, or over to here, and more (***).  Reference the "militant" word above to compare the proof of the certificate of federal non-filing (to NH RSA 123:1 from 1-8-17 U.S.Const.) to proof by way of  evidence by force alone. Potok is a coward! chicken-shit fence sitter who lives in the gray twilight who knows neither victory nor defeat. He calls strategies like by generals in the map room during a war in-fighting.  Notice how Margo put it that "Potok has not spoken TO him in many years." (emphasis ADDed as a lecturer to a student, compared to him having spoke WITH Ed.)  Come-on Potok: if you're reading this: dare I say: "Wise up, or Die"? 

Have you/Potok ever heard the phrase: liar by deception?  Re: the use of deceit, as in mis-representation and trick, as in that http://www.unionleader.com newspaper that is FAR superior to this http://www.concordmonitor.com in that it/ the former did have a story of how this all originated by the Lebanon Police "trick"ing Ed by lying to him, that there was a water leak from his wife's dental office two Winters ago. And you support the liars!? Are you a liar too? 

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, New Hampshire 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone). ***

[error]

You'll have to ask Margot that. Perhaps she is still reading this thread.

[JosephSHaas]

You'll have to ask Margot that. Perhaps she is still reading this thread.

Margot,  Have you ever seen the 1981 movie: "The Chosen"?  http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0082175/ Not me, yet; ___. Just found by way of a Potok search at Google finding an interesting http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Chosen_%28Chaim_Potok%29 from the main page of http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chaim_Potok (1929-2002).

This movie about two boys playing baseball: "Danny purposely hits a line drive toward Reuven, shattering his glasses" and with the Literary theme of: "The pursuit of truth in a gray world".

Was this C. Potok related to Mark Potok?  And if so, why is his son(?) still living in the gray twilight? Ed has like hit that baseball in the form of the 123:1 evidence in the federal ballpark, but of course they don't want the ball to like fly to the bullseye handle that puts the judge down into the dunking booth water. Mark ought to help with the truth in the public arena, and all I see is him calling Ed names like an egomaniac.  So Mark: Please "wise up" and DO the right thing. Thank you, in advance.  - Joe

[scoop]

So we can assume, or read between the lines that Ed has included Kenline in that group of "slave" people?

Plus did Margo get this exact quote from Potok directly?  Did she call him or did he call her? 

The quote from  Ed Brown re: Kenline was part of a longer phone conversation in which he made clear that he no longer wanted to work with him, hence "parted ways." When I have more time, I can try to find the link so you can listen to it.

I did speak with Potok. I called him.

Here's the Kenline/Brown conversation. The first call got cut off, so it went into a second.
http://www.hipcast.com/export/Ped03c73160b520f67021d9cf17add9efYlB/R1REYGF3.mp3
http://dougkenline234.hipcast.com/download/77d0936c-ed1d-292f-08c0-a87f632aac60.mp3

[JosephSHaas]

So we can assume, or read between the lines that Ed has included Kenline in that group of "slave" people?

Plus did Margo get this exact quote from Potok directly?  Did she call him or did he call her? 

The quote from  Ed Brown re: Kenline was part of a longer phone conversation in which he made clear that he no longer wanted to work with him, hence "parted ways." When I have more time, I can try to find the link so you can listen to it.

I did speak with Potok. I called him.

Thanks Margot, but was that at the exact time you called him, or after your initial call, was it really a return call from him? He NEVER returned my call, and is either away from his desk, or on a trip somewhere, me leaving a voice recording that I presume he got, or maybe some janitor might have hit the wrong button while cleaning his office some night?

I guess you've got to SAY the magic words to get past his receptionist to him by saying you're from the media, so that what he says can be broadcast to more people.  Now WHO, in that case, is the more "egomaniac"?

Keep up the "good" work, as someday you might make it to perfection, as practice makes perfect.       - - Joe

[JosephSHaas]

From the UL:

http://www.unionleader.com/article.aspx?headline=Browns%27+support+takes+hit&articleId=b3ad77fc-dccf-4ab2-9ade-8deee403324f

Browns' support takes hit

By THE ASSOCIATED PRESS

CONCORD –

O.M.G. The great fly-fisherman, Richard Soucy of Portland, Maine http://www.highlandsflyfishing.com/ condemns the Browns!? rsoucy at maine.rr.com Re: him writing over at the http://www.unionleader.com that the Feds ought to "storm the property".  Richard: Please scope out the area before you cast.  The Feds have no business here in N.H. because they have not bowed down to us by filing those RSA Ch. 123:1 papers as required  by 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution with Bill Gardner's Office of Secretary of State in Concord. 

I've checked for Maine too down in MAss. for the Federal Filing, since your state was not incorporated until 1820, and guess what?  No papers exist down there either!  And the First Circuit Court in Boston has no papers either.  Thus Ed is right, and contrary to what Karen Shutt of #__ _____________ (St.) Manchester, N.H. wrote about too, along with Denise Bailey, of #__ ___________ (Street), Manchester, N.H.: does NOT need to be put "behind bars" and "locked up" at some "Correctional" Institute to learn the truth, because the truth is that he is right! on both the procedural and substantive due process of law, in what is NOT a "democracy" as thought-to-be the case by Don A.P., of Hancock, NH _____ but that is supposed to be an Art. IV, Sec. 4, U.S. Constitutional "Republican" form of government, of pre-scribed laws, and not this arbitrary justice by judges who manipulate juries by refusing to mark evidence into exhibits for them to make their decision.  You'd think that some of them/ the jurors would comment on this fact that they like shot at their target without getting the complete ammo. Their "verdict" was based on a statement that McAuliffee said that all the tax laws have been declared lawful in all courts, of which his very court in 1983 by my landlord case #M.83-50-D of: I.R.S. v. Haas proved NOT the case, as section 5 of the Internal Revenue Code for rents was and still is un-constitutional. McAuliffe ought to declare a mistrial!

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, New Hampshire 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059.

P.S. Ed is right, and Elaine might be part wrong, in reference to her corporation taxes (she DID pay her employees to deal with the gov't themselves as Vivian Killens did in the 1940s as written up in the "Reader's Digest" and her book, in that she does NOT work for the gov't!).  So WHY didn't the state of New Hampshire take her to state court? instead of piggy-backing on the Feds to take the left-overs?  That buckling under to allow the Feds to hop skip and jump over the RSA Ch. 123:1 requirement shows us who they really are: the N.H. Department of Revenue Administration Commissioner has violated his RSA Ch. 92:2  oath of office, and will be getting a copy of this by me in person later this afternoon, with a copy to my State Reps to call for the Art. 63 impeachment of the Executive Councilors if they do not hold him accountable to this violation of his oath of office!

[JosephSHaas]

Here's a re-type of my e-mail just sent at exactly 10:01 a.m.
To: The Executive Council, Concord, N.H.
http://www.nh.gov/council/contact.html

"Dear Councilors:

--Would you please set up a day and time for a hearing in your chambers, in regards to Blatsos having violated his RSA Ch. 92:2 oath of office by elevating the Feds to over the RSA 123:1 requirements, subordinating the state to a secondary position for any left-overs in the Ed Brown case.

--A copy of this charge is printed over at
http://newhampshireunderground.com/forum/index.php?topic=3868.5355
as Reply #5357 on page 358 posted at 8:50 AM this morning
and to where you're welcome to comment here or there.

--Copies of this e-mail are being sent to my State Reps and three Senators for where I live in Gilmanton, work in Concord, and have a summer place in Boscawen.  The reason of which is that if they don't see you fire public servant Blatsos for insubordination to his oath to support both the U.S. and N.H. Constitutions, that they fire you by way of an Art. 63 impeachment of you through the Article 17 + 38 processes.

Yours truly, - - - - - - - - - - Joe / Joseph S. Haas, P.O. Box 3842, Concord, N.H. 03302, Tel. 603: 848-6059 (cell phone)."

- - Joe H.

[JosephSHaas]

This just in my Hotmail inbox:

"The law provides that once state and federal jurisdiction has been challenged, it must* be proven." Main v. Thiboutot. 100 S.Ct. 2502 (1980). ___ [but HOW, in what manner, by WHO and WHEN, and IF they don't do their job to prove jurisdiction, WHAT happens and is supposed to happen, with penalties of $__________ against the public servant who refuses to comply, the victim so wronged by such, and the whistle blower able to sue for __ and __ percent of the fine respectfully?]

-- Joe H.

P.S. In other words, when Ed said this in federal court, and that I backed up by the copy of the certificate of federal non-filing to N.H. RSA Ch. 123:1 http://www.state.nh.us (click on the laws section). [by 1-8-17 U.S. Constitution], that I gave to the U.S. Attorney Tom Collantuano, who by Fed. Rule 16 and State Rule 3.8 had to give a copy to both the judge and the defendant(s), but didn't, and the State PCC (Professional Conduct Committee/ Jim DeHart's Office) said they don't give a shit, they can be un-professional, as their PCC is a protection racket for the "brothas of da bah), the judge/clerk shall* or must as the mandatory requirement provide PROOF of filing (like a police officer asks you when he pulls you over to the side of the road, in your car in a traffic stop: ver are yer papers?) or else HALT the case, or at the very minimum: declare a mistrial!  So WHY isn't the U.S. Marshal being the executive check-and-balance to this by returning the Arrest Warrant marked a Non Est Return?  Or the governor asserting his Art. 41 powers to enforce all legislative mandates by the "shall" word in RSA 123:1? Or the three county sheriffs putting their feet down in Grafton, Sullivan and Merrimack Counties?  Or the Federal Reps telling their Legislative Court Officer, McAuliffee to do his job? It seems that everybody thinks of to let that other branch of government to do the job, and so to read this case of #___ pages to see WHO is responsible for this LAW ENFORCEMENT. __ Plus a part of the answer to the question being: federal funds and paychecks to pay off their mortgages or they'd end up homeless living on the streets. The county and state getting $hundreds of thousands and $millions respectfully, so them like in that quote that I paraphrase from one of our founding fathers, that they love wealth more than the liberty to their fellow man and so ought to bend down and lick the hands that feed them! This bending down by Blatsos as described above is just disgusting!

[Kat Kanning]

Homeland Security Responds to Helicopter Harassment at Brown's Private Picnic

Fort Fairfield Journal | August 24, 2007
David Deschesne

On Saturday, July 14, a Department of Homeland Security Helicopter hovered over the home of Ed and Elaine Brown for over four hours, skimming the tree tops and beeping its on-board siren at a crowd of over 200 people who had assembled there to enjoy a barbecue picnic and concert with the Browns.

The Fort Fairfield Journal has received a copy of a letter from the Department of Homeland Security to Senator Collins regarding the incident.


The letter states the helicopter was a U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP) aircraft, whose agents were operating in support of U.S. Marshall Service and Internal Revenue Service agents in an ongoing investigation of Ed and Elaine Brown.

"Ed and Elaine Brown are convicted felons under federal tax statutes," wrote Luke P. Bellocchi, Assistant Commissioner, Office of Congressional Affairs with the U.S. Customs and Border Protection. "Since their conviction, the Browns have resisted federal arrest warrants by securing themselves in a compound and refusing to surrender themselves to federal law enforcement officials."

There is currently no law in the United States requiring the filing of an income tax form, or payment of the taxes. Since there is no law, the Browns are guilty of nothing and the Federal Court ruling and arrest warrant are therefore bogus. Tax researcher, Tommy Cryer recently won a court case against the I.R.S. where I.R.S. agents and attorneys for the United States were unable to prove to a jury there is any law requiring the filing or payment of income tax in the United States.

Contrary to Bellocchi's opinion that the Browns are secured in a "compound," this writer has visited their home and found it to be a well-kept home in a secluded, upper class part of town. The use of the word "compound" to describe what is otherwise a couple's home is likely a psychological warfare term designed to portray a negative image on otherwise peaceful, God-fearing Americans who simply want their government to be held accountable when enforcing laws that simply don't exist.

While the Browns and their guests were enjoying each other's company in the midst of a picnic and concert, the helicopter continuously skimmed the crowd and hovered over the treetops in an apparent harassment and intimidation exercise. Bellocchi defends those actions by writing, "The operation involving the aircraft was necessary to further apprehension of the Browns and to secure officer safety in that effort. No violations of agency policy or regulations occurred during the mission."

Due to operational security and officer safety, Bellocchi was unable to release the names of the pilots or agents involved in that ongoing operation.

Bellocchi admits that intelligence data reveals that "the Brown compound contains significant passive and active traps and devices designed to thwart apprehension. Surveillance and video footage provided by the CBP aircraft was necessary to the law enforcement efforts of both the I.R.S. and U.S. Marshals in the performance of their duties."

The Browns continue to resist the illegal arrest warrant on the fraudulent Failure to File court ruling, issued in the Spring of this year. A third "Live Free or Die" concert is scheduled at their home on September 15. Go to www.makethestand.com or www.thepowerhour.com for more information.

[Russell Kanning]

Last week, Miller distributed an e-mailed "press release" clarifying his unwillingness to continue to support the Browns.

If I am thinking of the same guy ... I like him much better that Ed.

"I'm not talking any more to people who aren't going to stand up for the lawful laws of this land," Brown said in an internet recording of the conversation in which the two parted ways. "People can be slaves, and I'm not going to associate with them any more."

Maybe I will have to call him and let him know .... I also will not stand up for the lawful laws .... If I did ... then I would be a slave ... or at least on the

Mark Potok ... said it's not surprising that Ed Brown has repeatedly clashed with his supporters. He said leaders in right-wing fringe groups typically fight among themselves as much as they agree on their common enemies.

they sometimes also wear pirate outfits
... or argue on online forums
... or make fun of the adl

[JosephSHaas]

Homeland Security Responds to Helicopter Harassment at Brown's Private Picnic

Fort Fairfield Journal | August 24, 2007
David Deschesne

On Saturday, July 14, a Department of Homeland Security Helicopter hovered over the home of Ed and Elaine Brown for over four hours, skimming the tree tops and beeping its on-board siren at a crowd of over 200 people who had assembled there to enjoy a barbecue picnic and concert with the Browns.

... Bellocchi defends those actions by writing, "The operation involving the aircraft was necessary to further apprehension of the Browns and(*) to secure officer safety in that effort. No violations of agency policy or regulations occurred during the mission."  ....

(*) Does this mean that they were simply making sure that nothing happened to their undercover operatives on the ground there? And if anything did happen to them adversely, that the SWAT team would then enter the picture? to try to rescue their men.

What if a dunking booth was constructed?  Would "they" might think that it be filled with acid when one of their guys make it to the perch? 

[Nicholas Gilman]

   . 
I believe that page 8 contains a  disparity caused in part by a corrupt organization which masquerades
as "the government".

http://www.atf.gov/firearms/trace_data/states_and_territories/cy2006-newhampshire.pdf

    My guess is Plainfield has such a high rate due to the fact that the feds took away Ed's firearms,
and the fact that the PD and sheriff are searching visitors.