As many of you know Vince Milano and I are very active in trying to get
the New Hampshire State Guard (NHSG)reactivated to which end I writing
to ask you to consider volunteering to join. This would permit us to
intergrate the training activities of both our reenacting organization
with that of the NHSG. Many of you have already joined which is great,
but the NHSG needs more people if it is ever going to get off the
ground.

http://groups.yahoo.com/group/NewHampshireStateGuardStudyGroup

Won't you please join today, the Old Man needs your help!!!

I have a surplus amount of eye pads for the 1st. aid kits ... asking 4
for $1.50 including 1st. class mail ( USA only ) ... 40 avail. plz e-
mail me direct: hamkb1dvu@... if interested ... thanks ... Gary L.

Blake Taylore's newly released novel "Keeper of the Souls" may be an
interest to all of you as the novel is filled with references to
today's economic turmoil.  Blake's style is easy and detailed, almost
making the reader feel that they are in Maine where the novel is set.
It's a great read for entertainment, while at the same time the novel
provides a unique means of helping the average American get out from
under the massive burden imposed by the wealthy, powerful cooperate and
political leaders.  The novel gives hope for a better tommorrow.  For
more information about "Keeper of the Souls" and to read the first
chapter on line go to: www.blaketaylore.com  You can order the book
from the website.

"A democracy is always temporary in nature: it simple cannot exist as
a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist up
until the voters discover that they can vote themselves generous gifts
from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority will
always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from the
public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally
collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a
dictatorship.

The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the
beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200
years, these nations always progressed through the following sequence:

       From bondage to spiritual faith;
       From spiritual faith to great courage;
       From courage to liberty;
       From liberty to abundance;
       From abundance to complacency;
       From complacency to apathy;
       From apathy to dependence;
       From dependency back into bondage."

Lord Thomas Macaulay

- Thank you for the reminder of what we have to look fwd to !

-- In newenglandmilitiaallianceii@yahoogroups.com, "warhorse_03826"
<warhorse_03826@...> wrote:
>
> "A democracy is always temporary in nature: it simple cannot exist
as
> a permanent form of government. A democracy will continue to exist
up
> until the voters discover that they can vote themselves generous
gifts
> from the public treasury. From that moment on, the majority will
> always vote for the candidates who promise the most benefits from
the
> public treasury, with the result that every democracy will finally
> collapse due to loose fiscal policy, (which is) always followed by a
> dictatorship.
>
> The average age of the world's greatest civilizations from the
> beginning of history, has been about 200 years. During those 200
> years, these nations always progressed through the following
sequence:
>
>       From bondage to spiritual faith;
>       From spiritual faith to great courage;
>       From courage to liberty;
>       From liberty to abundance;
>       From abundance to complacency;
>       From complacency to apathy;
>       From apathy to dependence;
>       From dependency back into bondage."
>
> Lord Thomas Macaulay
>

what else we have to look forward to....

1)biden says his great success was the assault weapons ban that has
since expired. expect renewed action on that front, with expanded
things like no grandfathering or a further limitation on things like
the number of firearms you can own or how many magazines you can own.

2)obama wants a "civilian security corps" as well equipped, funded and
trained as the US military. no posse comitatus limitations (not that
they followed those anyways, but still). I fully expect it to be a
"blanket" agency supervising (if not taking over)the fieldwork of
every other alphabet-soup agency,(ATF FBI DEA ect ect) and also expect
there to be some sort of test to join it similar to the "twentynine
palms survey" most of us are familiar with. can't have an effective
thought police if they go thinking for themselves, now can we? and all
those people voted for him because they thought Homeland Security was
bad. SURPRISE...and repeat after me "papers, please"

3)expect a full withdrawal of US troops from pretty nearly everywhere.
with a lack of stateside barracks space tent cities will be placed in
open areas of US bases. expect morale to plummet, retention will be
impossible. a good portion of the US army will cease to be an
effective fighting force. similar problems will happen in the other
armed forces as well.

4)obama will bring in many former clinton aides. expect expanded law
enforcement scrutiny on militas and survivalist groups.

"Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its
victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under
robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber
baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be
satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us
without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience."

- C. S. Lewis

--- In newenglandmilitiaallianceii@yahoogroups.com, "warhorse_03826"
<warhorse_03826@...> wrote:
>
> what else we have to look forward to....
>
> 1)biden says his great success was the assault weapons ban that has
> since expired. expect renewed action on that front, with expanded
> things like no grandfathering or a further limitation on things like
> the number of firearms you can own or how many magazines you can own.

``Address Gun Violence in Cities: As president, Barack Obama would
repeal the Tiahrt Amendment, which restricts the ability of local law
enforcement to access important gun trace information, and give police
officers across the nation the tools they need to solve gun crimes and
fight the illegal arms trade. Obama and Biden also favor commonsense
measures that respect the Second Amendment rights of gun owners, while
keeping guns away from children and from criminals who shouldn't have
them. They support closing the gun show loophole and making guns in
this country childproof. They also support making the expired federal
Assault Weapons Ban permanent, as such weapons belong on foreign
battlefields and not on our streets.
(retrieved Fri Nov 7 21:20:44 UTC 2008 from
http://change.gov/agenda/urbanpolicy/.)''

Man Files Pro Se For Injunction To Stop The Bailout,
Tells Federal Court Injunction or Rebellion
Asks you to call the court house and tell them you too want the injunction. 
  Larry Bumgarner, founder of Reenactment of 1776, possessor of no law degree,
a member of the lower & middleclass, accompanied by a reporter from the Atlantic
City Press, filed pro se, for a permanent injunction in federal Court to stop
H.R. 1424, aka, “The Bailout.”  Also filed was a motion for a temporary
injunction, which is to be heard on Monday, November 17, 2008.  It was filed
for himself, you and everyone you know that is in the lower & middleclass.  It
also would be what the founding fathers would want done.  The filing fees were
paid for with two weeks of unemployment checks.    
  The injunction is sought because it is unethical, immoral and illegal
  The Bailout is immoral and unethical.  My money, your money and
everybody’s money in the lower & middleclass will go to capitalize individuals
and institutions that are corrupt and criminal.  The bailout is akin to giving
the mafia money because they lost on their betting operations.   
  The bailout violates the Thirteenth Amendment.  People in the lower &
middleclass will be put into Involuntary Servitude.  The lower & middleclass
will be made responsible for paying for someone else’s mistakes, debts and
financial losses.  Neither the plaintiff nor members of the lower & middleclass
need a lawyer, an expert witness or a judge to know what that means.  We as a
class of people have been put into the cotton fields, indentured servants to our
masters, the legal class.  That’s slavery and is also protected by the
Thirteenth Amendment.      
  The bailout violates Section 1581 of Title 18.  It is unlawful to hold a
person in “debt servitude,” or peonage, which is closely related to
involuntary servitude.  If the bailout is financed with treasury bills, notes
and bonds then the people are the collateral used to back these instruments. 
If these instruments fail then the lower & middleclass are responsible for
making the investors whole.  The banking system is not collateralized, only the
people.  The banking system reaps all of the rewards while the risk is put on
the people.  The lower & middleclass will be put into debt servitude.
  Previously the courts have rejected these two arguments.  They said these
claims were a thin disguise for the people not to pay taxes.  A rose by any
other name is a rose.  A tax liability and a debt liability are both one and
the same.  That argument doesn’t cut it.  Neither does the argument that the
people can change things with voting.  At one time voting maybe worked, but no
more.  The legal class has made it so.     
  There is a two class system in Americatoday, the “lower & middleclass”
and the “legal class.”  The legal class, the “despots” have created
their own class replete with rights, privileges and immunities separate and of
the lower & middleclass.  The legal class has monopolized all three branches of
government at every level of government in this country.  They have monopolized
the political parties.  There is no longer a Democrat or a Republican, only the
legal class.  They have free access to governments that the lower & middleclass
do not enjoy.  They make their own rules for themselves and they police their
own selves.  The legal class has created despotism as written about in the
Declaration of Independence.  The result is we have a tyrannical government. 
The money only goes to one class.  Only one class pays for the bailout.  One
class gets all of the benefits and the other gets all of the financial
outlays.  Because of
  this the lower & middleclass is a “subject” class, much like Afro Americans
were.  The bailout then causes the lower & middleclass to suffer equal rights
violations.
  The Equal Protection Clause, part of the Fourteenth Amendment to the United
States Constitution, provides that “no state shall… deny to any person
within its jurisdiction the equal protection of the laws.”   The bailout
will cause the lower & middleclass tol suffer constitutional rights
violations.   
  The Bill of Rights prohibits the federal government from depriving any person
of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law.  This speaks for
itself.
  The ShermanAntitrust Act, The Clayton Antitrust Act & The Celler-Kefauver Act
of 1950.  The banks that the government is creating will have a monopoly on the
banking industry.  It will be open season to use and abuse the lower &
middleclass.  It will be easier to corrupt the banking system and they will be
more risky to the economy. 
  Because the plaintiff is pro se and because plaintiff’s claim is about
constitutional violations, then the judge is bound by law to find and site any
law, claim, amendment, document or any thing the federal judge can site and use
that the plaintiff has not used, used incorrectly or should have used.  The
laws are sited.  The federal court is the court of the people, born out of
rebellion and created to protect the people.  Members of the legal class are
being asked to rule on the legal class.  We will see if despotism has made its
way into the federal court system.          
  The Brief also points out the following:
  There have been a lot of lower & middleclass people who have died and been
maimed and wounded to protect and save this court and the constitution.  This
plaintiff, the people of the lower & middleclass expect the same kind of
attitude in return.  Is this Federal Court now going to protect us?  Save
us?  Preserve us?  That is what the lower & middleclass have done for this
Federal Court.
  Larry Bumgarner concluded his brief by stating that, “he could not speak
for anyone else in the lower & middleclass, that for him and him only, it was
injunction or rebellion.”  I’ve had enough.    
  Tired of it all?  Want to vent, rant and/or rave?  Want to raise some
hell?  Want to just make a comment, a statement. 
  Look at it like you’re kicking someone in the groin who is making your life
very miserable.  Call as many times as you like.  Every time during the day
that you get upset, like when you have to make the choice between gas or food,
and/or you haven’t been out in ages, go ahead, relieve yourself by calling and
complaining.  You’ll find it therapeutic.  Call as many times a day as you
would like.        
To Be Heard Monday, November 17
Please call the federal court house in Camden, NJat
1-866-726-0726 or 1-856-757 5021
and tell the receptionist to tell the judge that you too want the injunction. 
If you wish, remain anonymous but tell them what state you are calling from so
they know that the country is watching.
Larry Bumgarner vs. USA, Civil Action No. 08-cv-5245 
 
If you wish to view the complaint, here is the link. 
http://www.reenactmentof1776.com/Counter%20Proposal%20To%20Bailout.htm
 
Reenactment of 1776
Dedicated to a real life reenactment of 1776,
to change lawyers and politicians from being our masters to being our servants.
  Pro constitutional, pro Americaas the founding fathers envisioned it.
reenactmentof1776.com
 
Larry Bumgarner
205 Toulon Ave.
West Atlantic City, NJ08234
609 816-7974

unfortunately I think this movement is at least on hold, if not shut
down.

the yahoo groups page has been removed, and requests by me to have it
recreated have not resulted in anything.

it is unfortunate. it showed a lot of promise.

it would not have been signed off by the governor in the configuration
they would have presented (he has a National Guard already, selling him
a copy of that built on the State Guard dime probably wouldn't have
worked) but that could have been altered at a later date.

13 - 14 Dec.  Gun Show Eastern States Expo W. Springfield, MA

can we get this in New Hampshire?

http://www.blueservo.net/

The Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition (TBSC) has joined BlueServoSM in
a public-private partnership to deploy the Virtual Community Watch, an
innovative real-time surveillance program designed to empower the
public to proactively participate in fighting border crime.

The TBSC BlueServoSM Virtual Community WatchSM is a network of cameras
and sensors along the Texas-Mexico border that feeds live streaming
video to www.BlueServo.net. Users will log in to the BlueServoSM
website and directly monitor suspicious criminal activity along the
border via this virtual fenceSM.

Citizens can sign up as Virtual Texas DeputiesSM to participate in
border surveillance through this social network. Virtual Texas
DeputiesSM from around the country will monitor the streaming video
from these cameras 24/7 and report any suspicious activities directly
to the Border Sheriffs via email. All emails regarding suspicious
activity will be submitted anonymously.

The Public, acting as Virtual Texas DeputiesSM, is limited to
reporting suspicious activities via email. Local county Sheriffs will
respond to these reports, conduct all investigations, and take
appropriate actions. This service will provide millions of dollars in
benefits to local border Sheriffs, with the public acting as
additional pairs of eyes for Deputies on the ground. This extra
surveillance will allow the public to directly participate in reducing
crime and improving their communities. It is a well-established fact
that citizen involvement in community watch programs such as this one
reduces crime.

Another facet of this program is the ability of the public to connect
their own cameras to www.BlueServo.net to create local Virtual
Neighborhood WatchesSM in order to protect their own homes,
neighborhoods, and families from criminal acts. These Virtual
Neighborhood WatchesSM can, in turn, be connected to form additional
Virtual Community WatchesSM.

Membership on www.BlueServo.net site is free and open to anyone by
signing up and obtaining a User Log-In. Because www.BlueServo.net is
an internet social network, in the future, BlueServoSM anticipates
that high volume of traffic to its website will generate advertising
revenue to defray the operations cost of the Virtual Community WatchSM
to the Texas Border Sheriff's Coalition.

http://www.geocities.com/elmgrove1765/project6/project6.html

http://www.metalworking.com/DropBox/AR_15_Scratch_Built_Receiver.pdf

http://www.thecmp.org/eligibility.htm

everyone here that is able, should get an M1 Garand this year.

the requirements are not all that difficult.

Proof of U.S. Citizenship
Proof of Age
Membership in CMP Affiliated Organization:
Marksmanship or other Firearms Related Activity:
Be Legally Eligible to Purchase a Firearm:

-Last July I attended the "Appleseed" event in Jericho, VT ... they
issued a certificate of participation which qualified for CMP ... go to
www.rwva.org for more info on Appleseed events ... Altho I did not get
an M-1 Garand ( as I already have a M-14 ), the training was well
worthwhile.
-- In newenglandmilitiaallianceii@yahoogroups.com, "warhorse_03826"
<warhorse_03826@...> wrote:
>
> http://www.thecmp.org/eligibility.htm
>
> everyone here that is able, should get an M1 Garand this year.
>
> the requirements are not all that difficult.
>
> Proof of U.S. Citizenship
> Proof of Age
> Membership in CMP Affiliated Organization:
> Marksmanship or other Firearms Related Activity:
> Be Legally Eligible to Purchase a Firearm:
>

Government explained...  (About 11 minutes long, but worth watching)
A look at the future?

http://www.wimp.com/thegovernment

South eastern Vermont checking in. Looking to setup loose network of
friends to barter and comminicate with.

- Welcome aboard from Gary L. in western MA

-- In newenglandmilitiaallianceii@yahoogroups.com, "wolfslayer71"
<wolfslayer71@...> wrote:
>
> South eastern Vermont checking in. Looking to setup loose network of
> friends to barter and comminicate with.
>

http://milliongunownermarch.com/index.htm

http://cspan.org/Watch/watch.aspx?MediaId=HP-A-15821

go to about 20:16 on

our brand new attorney general wants to reinstate the assault weapons ban.

to help the mexicans.

because we all know those full-auto chinese AK-47's the bad guys use
down there come from US gun shows.

Allen

mark from nh checking in

i do have a forum setup http://nhman.gitrweb.com
i'm setting up a mutual assist network in new hampshire
thats linked with the maine patriot board.

it's simply a network of like minded folks that one could
call on in the time of need.

any questions just drop by the forum

thanks again mark

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/legislation/2009/hcr0006.html

HCR 6 � AS INTRODUCED

2009 SESSION

09-0274

09/01

HOUSE CONCURRENT RESOLUTION 6

A RESOLUTION affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

SPONSORS: Rep. Itse, Rock 9; Rep. Ingbretson, Graf 5; Rep. Comerford,
Rock 9; Sen. Denley, Dist 3

COMMITTEE: State-Federal Relations and Veterans Affairs

ANALYSIS

This house concurrent resolution affirms States' rights based on
Jeffersonian principles.

09-0274

09/01

STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

In the Year of Our Lord Two Thousand Nine

A RESOLUTION affirming States' rights based on Jeffersonian principles.

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 1,
Article 7 declares that the people of this State have the sole and
exclusive right of governing themselves as a free, sovereign, and
independent State; and do, and forever hereafter shall, exercise and
enjoy every power, jurisdiction, and right, pertaining thereto, which
is not, or may not hereafter be, by them expressly delegated to the
United States of America in congress assembled; and

Whereas the Constitution of the State of New Hampshire, Part 2,
Article 1 declares that the people inhabiting the territory formerly
called the province of New Hampshire, do hereby solemnly and mutually
agree with each other, to form themselves into a free, sovereign and
independent body-politic, or State, by the name of The State of New
Hampshire; and

Whereas the State of New Hampshire when ratifying the Constitution for
the United States of America recommended as a change, "First That it
be Explicitly declared that all Powers not expressly & particularly
Delegated by the aforesaid are reserved to the several States to be,
by them Exercised;" and

Whereas the other States that included recommendations, to wit
Massachusetts, New York, North Carolina, Rhode Island and Virginia,
included an identical or similar recommended change; and

Whereas these recommended changes were incorporated as the ninth
amendment, the enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights,
shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the
people, and the tenth amendment, the powers not delegated to the
United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States,
are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people, to the
Constitution for the United States of America; now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the House of Representatives, the Senate concurring:

That the several States composing the United States of America, are
not united on the principle of unlimited submission to their General
Government; but that, by a compact under the style and title of a
Constitution for the United States, and of amendments thereto, they
constituted a General Government for special purposes, -- delegated to
that government certain definite powers, reserving, each State to
itself, the residuary mass of right to their own self-government; and
that whensoever the General Government assumes undelegated powers, its
acts are unauthoritative, void, and of no force; that to this compact
each State acceded as a State, and is an integral party, its co-States
forming, as to itself, the other party: that the government created by
this compact was not made the exclusive or final judge of the extent
of the powers delegated to itself; since that would have made its
discretion, and not the Constitution, the measure of its powers; but
that, as in all other cases of compact among powers having no common
judge, each party has an equal right to judge for itself, as well of
infractions as of the mode and measure of redress; and

That the Constitution of the United States, having delegated to
Congress a power to punish treason, counterfeiting the securities and
current coin of the United States, piracies, and felonies committed on
the high seas, and offences against the law of nations, slavery, and
no other crimes whatsoever; and it being true as a general principle,
and one of the amendments to the Constitution having also declared,
that "the powers not delegated to the United States by the
Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the
States respectively, or to the people," therefore all acts of Congress
which assume to create, define, or punish crimes, other than those so
enumerated in the Constitution are altogether void, and of no force;
and that the power to create, define, and punish such other crimes is
reserved, and, of right, appertains solely and exclusively to the
respective States, each within its own territory; and

That it is true as a general principle, and is also expressly declared
by one of the amendments to the Constitution, that "the powers not
delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by
it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the
people;" and that no power over the freedom of religion, freedom of
speech, or freedom of the press being delegated to the United States
by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, all lawful
powers respecting the same did of right remain, and were reserved to
the States or the people: that thus was manifested their determination
to retain to themselves the right of judging how far the
licentiousness of speech and of the press may be abridged without
lessening their useful freedom, and how far those abuses which cannot
be separated from their use should be tolerated, rather than the use
be destroyed. And thus also they guarded against all abridgment by the
United States of the freedom of religious opinions and exercises, and
retained to themselves the right of protecting the same. And that in
addition to this general principle and express declaration, another
and more special provision has been made by one of the amendments to
the Constitution, which expressly declares, that "Congress shall make
no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the
free exercise thereof, or abridging the freedom of speech or of the
press:" thereby guarding in the same sentence, and under the same
words, the freedom of religion, of speech, and of the press: insomuch,
that whatever violated either, throws down the sanctuary which covers
the others, and that libels, falsehood, and defamation, equally with
heresy and false religion, are withheld from the cognizance of federal
tribunals. That, therefore, all acts of Congress of the United States
which do abridge the freedom of religion, freedom of speech, freedom
of the press, are not law, but are altogether void, and of no force; and

That the construction applied by the General Government (as is
evidenced by sundry of their proceedings) to those parts of the
Constitution of the United States which delegate to Congress a power
"to lay and collect taxes, duties, imports, and excises, to pay the
debts, and provide for the common defense and general welfare of the
United States," and "to make all laws which shall be necessary and
proper for carrying into execution the powers vested by the
Constitution in the government of the United States, or in any
department or officer thereof," goes to the destruction of all limits
prescribed to their power by the Constitution: that words meant by the
instrument to be subsidiary only to the execution of limited powers,
ought not to be so construed as themselves to give unlimited powers,
nor a part to be so taken as to destroy the whole residue of that
instrument: that the proceedings of the General Government under color
of these articles, will be a fit and necessary subject of revisal and
correction; and

That a committee of conference and correspondence be appointed, which
shall have as its charge to communicate the preceding resolutions to
the Legislatures of the several States; to assure them that this State
continues in the same esteem of their friendship and union which it
has manifested from that moment at which a common danger first
suggested a common union: that it considers union, for specified
national purposes, and particularly to those specified in their
federal compact, to be friendly to the peace, happiness and prosperity
of all the States: that faithful to that compact, according to the
plain intent and meaning in which it was understood and acceded to by
the several parties, it is sincerely anxious for its preservation:
that it does also believe, that to take from the States all the powers
of self-government and transfer them to a general and consolidated
government, without regard to the special delegations and reservations
solemnly agreed to in that compact, is not for the peace, happiness or
prosperity of these States; and that therefore this State is
determined, as it doubts not its co-States are, to submit to
undelegated, and consequently unlimited powers in no man, or body of
men on earth: that in cases of an abuse of the delegated powers, the
members of the General Government, being chosen by the people, a
change by the people would be the constitutional remedy; but, where
powers are assumed which have not been delegated, a nullification of
the act is the rightful remedy: that every State has a natural right
in cases not within the compact, (casus non foederis), to nullify of
their own authority all assumptions of power by others within their
limits: that without this right, they would be under the dominion,
absolute and unlimited, of whosoever might exercise this right of
judgment for them: that nevertheless, this State, from motives of
regard and respect for its co-States, has wished to communicate with
them on the subject: that with them alone it is proper to communicate,
they alone being parties to the compact, and solely authorized to
judge in the last resort of the powers exercised under it, Congress
being not a party, but merely the creature of the compact, and subject
as to its assumptions of power to the final judgment of those by whom,
and for whose use itself and its powers were all created and modified:
that if the acts before specified should stand, these conclusions
would flow from them: that it would be a dangerous delusion were a
confidence in the men of our choice to silence our fears for the
safety of our rights: that confidence is everywhere the parent of
despotism -- free government is founded in jealousy, and not in
confidence; it is jealousy and not confidence which prescribes limited
constitutions, to bind down those whom we are obliged to trust with
power: that our Constitution has accordingly fixed the limits to
which, and no further, our confidence may go. In questions of power,
then, let no more be heard of confidence in man, but bind him down
from mischief by the chains of the Constitution. That this State does
therefore call on its co-States for an expression of their sentiments
on acts not authorized by the federal compact. And it doubts not that
their sense will be so announced as to prove their attachment
unaltered to limited government, whether general or particular. And
that the rights and liberties of their co-States will be exposed to no
dangers by remaining embarked in a common bottom with their own. That
they will concur with this State in considering acts as so palpably
against the Constitution as to amount to an undisguised declaration
that that compact is not meant to be the measure of the powers of the
General Government, but that it will proceed in the exercise over
these States, of all powers whatsoever: that they will view this as
seizing the rights of the States, and consolidating them in the hands
of the General Government, with a power assumed to bind the States,
not merely as the cases made federal, (casus foederis,) but in all
cases whatsoever, by laws made, not with their consent, but by others
against their consent: that this would be to surrender the form of
government we have chosen, and live under one deriving its powers from
its own will, and not from our authority; and that the co-States,
recurring to their natural right in cases not made federal, will
concur in declaring these acts void, and of no force, and will each
take measures of its own for providing that neither these acts, nor
any others of the General Government not plainly and intentionally
authorized by the Constitution, shall be exercised within their
respective territories; and

That the said committee be authorized to communicate by writing or
personal conferences, at any times or places whatever, with any person
or person who may be appointed by any one or more co-States to
correspond or confer with them; and that they lay their proceedings
before the next session of the General Court; and

That any Act by the Congress of the United States, Executive Order of
the President of the United States of America or Judicial Order by the
Judicatories of the United States of America which assumes a power not
delegated to the government of United States of America by the
Constitution for the United States of America and which serves to
diminish the liberty of the any of the several States or their
citizens shall constitute a nullification of the Constitution for the
United States of America by the government of the United States of
America. Acts which would cause such a nullification include, but are
not limited to:

I. Establishing martial law or a state of emergency within one of the
States comprising the United States of America without the consent of
the legislature of that State.

II. Requiring involuntary servitude, or governmental service other
than a draft during a declared war, or pursuant to, or as an
alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

III. Requiring involuntary servitude or governmental service of
persons under the age of 18 other than pursuant to, or as an
alternative to, incarceration after due process of law.

IV. Surrendering any power delegated or not delegated to any
corporation or foreign government.

V. Any act regarding religion; further limitations on freedom of
political speech; or further limitations on freedom of the press.

VI. Further infringements on the right to keep and bear arms including
prohibitions of type or quantity of arms or ammunition; and

That should any such act of Congress become law or Executive Order or
Judicial Order be put into force, all powers previously delegated to
the United States of America by the Constitution for the United States
shall revert to the several States individually. Any future government
of the United States of America shall require ratification of three
quarters of the States seeking to form a government of the United
States of America and shall not be binding upon any State not seeking
to form such a government; and

That copies of this resolution be transmitted by the house clerk to
the President of the United States, each member of the United States
Congress, and the presiding officers of each State's legislature.

allen tanner (warhorse_03826@...) has sent you a news article.
------------------------------------------------------------
Personal message:

Some state lawmakers fighting federal stimulus

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090302/ap_on_re_us/states_rights_stimulus

CONCORD, N.H. � For small-government die-hards, the $787 billion economic
stimulus bill recently passed by Congress isn't a life saver. It's the last
straw.

Lawmakers across the country are sponsoring resolutions � most of them only
symbolic � asserting state sovereignty, in effect the right to ignore any
federal law or policies they deem unconstitutional, including the stimulus bill,
the No Child Left Behind Act and any new assault rifle ban.

In New Hampshire, the House is scheduled to vote on Republican state Rep. Daniel
Itse's resolution Wednesday. Supporters are planning a rally at the Statehouse
before the vote.

"I think that the specter of some assaults on our liberty have become so real
and immediate that there is a reaction," Itse said.

Lawmakers in at least 15 states are sponsoring similar resolutions. They say
they're fighting back against decades of federal overreach, culminating in the
stimulus package.

"This has been a progression from (the New Deal) days to today, with the only
break being Ronald Reagan," South Carolina state Rep. Michael Pitts said by
e-mail. Pitts, a Republican, has a resolution pending in the South Carolina
House. "The stimulus bill is simply propellant for the resistance."

In January, 22 percent of those surveyed by the Pew Research Center disapproved
of the stimulus. That number rose to 34 percent in February. The survey � which
polled about 1,300 respondents � has a sampling margin of error of plus or minus
3 percentage points.

Two lawmakers say they have received hundreds of calls from constituents
supporting their resolutions. Michigan state Rep. Paul Opsommer, a Republican,
said about 250 people have called or e-mailed to say thank you, whereas most of
his bills draw fewer than 10 messages.

Missouri Republican state Rep. Cynthia Davis, whose resolution is pending in the
House, said she has received at least 200 supportive messages from constituents
and residents in other states.

"I'm getting letters from all over the country," Davis said. "It's really a
beautiful thing, watching the spirit of the American Revolution come back."

Resolution sponsors cite the 10th Amendment, which says the federal government
has no authority beyond the powers granted to it under the Constitution.

Several governors � mainly Republican � have threatened to reject some of the
stimulus money, claiming it would raise taxes in their states. Some analysts see
the revolt as partisan posturing.

But Opsommer, who thinks the stimulus has spurred many of the resolutions, said
in an e-mail that the states' rights movement transcends party politics.

"Some Democrats feel it is an attack on Obama until I explain I also introduced
it last year," said Opsommer, whose resolution is pending in the Michigan House.
"This is about the rights of the states and the people, not anything to do with
Republicans or Democrats."

A Democrat in Kentucky, state Rep. John Will Stacy, is the prime sponsor of a
sovereignty resolution in that state. He did not immediately return calls.

The Oklahoma House recently passed a resolution from Republican state Sen. Randy
Brogdon. Most of the resolutions are nonbinding, but Brogdon's would have the
force of law if it passed the Senate.

Oklahoma's Democratic governor and attorney general would likely refuse to
enforce the resolution, Brogdon acknowledges.

Karl Kurtz, a policy analyst at the National Conference of State Legislatures,
couldn't say how many sovereignty resolutions Congress has received in prior
years, but he suspects the current craze is no accident.

"In the case of the sovereignty resolutions it appears to be an organized
campaign," Kurtz said, adding that states' rights activists may have influenced
the sponsors.

New Hampshire's Itse has ties to the Free State Project, which urges small
government activists to move to New Hampshire. Many project members also belong
to the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance, a states' rights group listing Itse as
its political director.

"Anybody who's willing to stand up and make a statement like that is a special
friend," said project spokesman Calvin Pratt. "I just wish we had thought of it
first."

Some in New Hampshire wish no one had thought of it. Richard Hesse, professor
emeritus of constitutional law at the Franklin Pierce Law Center in Concord,
said Itse's resolution could strip authority from state leaders, as well as from
Congress and the president.

"When you think about this claim that if a state believes a federal law is
unconstitutional it can just ignore it, then I presume if a county believed a
state law was unconstitutional it could just ignore it," Hesse said. "Really
what's implicit in this is an unwillingness to recognize a lawful authority."

it's not often that I ask anyone to contact their legislators.

honestly, I've never thought it would do any good. most legislators do
as they are steered by their party, and their campaign contributors,
want them to do.

however, it couldn't hurt to try this time.

residents of NH find your legislators here.
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/house/members/wml.aspx

please e-mail them to support HCR 6

sample e-mail..keep it short and to the point.

subject: HCR 6

I urge you to support HCR 6.

I am a voter and resident of ___________,NH.

my vote for you in the future will depend on how you vote on this.

(add name and town)

I got this e-mail back from one of my state reps today.

expect a roll call of who voted what soon...it hasn't been posted yet on the NH
website.

Hi Allen,

I am very sorry to report that HCR6 went down today to the anger of the crowd in
the gallery and its supporters on the floor including myself. Please do not
hesitate to look at the roll call vote and it will very clearly show who is for
New Hampshire and who is for federal intrusion.

Best regards,
Don

Don Van Patten
NH State Representative
Science, Technology and Energy Committee
Rockingham District 8

http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/Roll_calls/billstatus_rcdetails.aspx\
?yn=1&sy=2009&vs=27&lb=H&eb=HCR0006&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2009&txtbillnumbe\
r=hcr6&ddlsponsors=&q=1&lsr=274

this is the roll call vote for HCR 6

remember, a "yea" is a vote to kill the bill.

those of us that are NH residents need to remember these people the next time
around.

Allen

The 32 that didn't vote should also get a kick in the ass!



--- In newenglandmilitiaallianceii@yahoogroups.com, "warhorse_03826"
<warhorse_03826@...> wrote:
>
>
http://www.gencourt.state.nh.us/bill_status/Roll_calls/billstatus_rcdetails.aspx\
?yn=1&sy=2009&vs=27&lb=H&eb=HCR0006&sortoption=&txtsessionyear=2009&txtbillnumbe\
r=hcr6&ddlsponsors=&q=1&lsr=274
>
> this is the roll call vote for HCR 6
>
> remember, a "yea" is a vote to kill the bill.
>
> those of us that are NH residents need to remember these people the next time
around.
>
> Allen
>

here is the response I got from one of my legislators that voted to stop HCR6.

usually, arrogance like this doesn't phase me...but, "My assumption is that I
did not lose your vote on this matter, I assume I never had your vote." really
takes the cake. she has forgotten that she works for me, not the other way
around.

Allen,

Thank you for your e-mail. I appreciate all of the e-mails I receive from
constituents on both sides of the issues. Unfortunately, I cannot be everything
to everyone. As an attorney, I am a strong supporter of both the US and NH
Constitutions. My interpretation does vary from the interpretation represented
by HCR 6. So for both personal reasons, and to adequately represent the majority
of my constituents, I felt the right thing to do was to vote for the ITL. When I
took my oath to become a state legislator, I swore to uphold the Constitution of
New Hampshire and the Constitution of the United States.  Although Dan Itse
believes that implicit in this duty is the responsibility to oppose laws enacted
outside the Constitution, I disagree. I believe strongly in the checks and
balances provided by the Constitution. I believe it is the responsibility of the
Judiciary branch to ensure the Legislative branch does not act outside the
Constitution.
I have been working and continue to work on many important issues that face the
families and people of New Hampshire. There are hundreds of bills that will come
before us this session.  There is a lot of important work to do and I will
continue to support my constituents and make New Hampshire the best place to
live in this country. My assumption is that I did not lose your vote on this
matter, I assume I never had your vote.

Sincerely,
Melissa Lyons

On Thu, Mar 5, 2009 at 11:03 AM, <warhorse_03826@...> wrote:


     because of your "yea" vote to kill HCR 6, you have lost my vote.

     I will work to make sure you do not get re-elected next time.

     the US Constitution is a contract between the Federal Government and The
People. it gives very specific powers to the Federal government, and relegates
the rest to the states or the people.

     10th amendment to the Constitution

     "The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor
prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to
the people."

     this contract has been broken repeatedly.. HCR 6 was our filing for breach
of contract.

     Allen Tanner
     East Hampstead