This past weekend there were actually two gatherings of mask-freedom activists at New Hampshire governor Chris Sununu’s house at 71 Hemlock Ct. in Newfields, NH. The first was on Saturday when a small group paid a surprise visit to Sununu’s home. Within minutes, the police arrived and Sununu and his wife and kids left in separate cars.
The following day dozens more people showed up again at 2pm with signs, cameras, and a PA system to let their grievances be known. State police were on the scene as expected, but it didn’t appear the Sununus were at home. Here’s video of the rally from Vincent Moore of Shire Free Media:
Liberty-loving protestors descended on the home of NH Attorney General Gordon MacDonald – 128 Dickey Hill Rd in Deering, NH – on Thanksgiving Day to express their outrage that the state gang is threatening peaceful business owners. Local businesses across New Hampshire are being issued fines as high as $2,000 for violating the “emergency orders” of “HIS EXCELLENCY” governor Chris Sununu.
A hundred protestors went to Sununu’s house last weekend, but the protest at MacDonald’s house was organized in secret. As a result, police were not waiting on-site as they were at Sununu’s. However, it didn’t take long for the cops to be called by MacDonald’s attorney wife, Jennifer A Eber.
To the credit of Hillsboro police, they were respectful and on their best behavior. One of them even laughed at a joke that Nobody cracked and was generally quite friendly. Though he did try to get us to move our cars from the side of the road, he backed down when we pointed out we knew what an easement was.
Eber was not happy, demanding we be removed from “her property”. The attorney couple owns three large wooded lots across the street from their home, so Eber mistakenly believed that would protect them from such a protest. However, she didn’t realize the very same state gang that puts food on her table also has rules for “public ways” that allow us to engage in protests just like this. Apparently she doesn’t like it when people bring the destructive consequences of her husband’s actions home for her to experience.
As long as her husband keeps ruining peaceful people’s lives, and invading their businesses and homes with his bureaucracy, threats, and fines, she can expect we’ll continue to remind her about it. Here’s the video from yesterday’s protest:
It was cold and raining lightly in the beginning. We stayed for over an hour before the rain got quite heavy. Since the CDC has now told people they shouldn’t do caroling, we decided to bring back the Shire Choir and sang a few “Chronic Carols” before packing up and heading to a nearby activist Thanksgiving.
Protestors in front of NH governor’s home for the first time ever.
As originally announced here at Free Keene, approximately one hundred people gathered Sunday afternoon at New Hampshire’s “governor” Chris Sununu’s house at 71 Hemlock Ct. in Newfields, NH. Many had been pushed over their limit by his recent statewide mask mandate, but it wasn’t just about him trying to tell people what to wear, it was also about ruining businesses and destroying jobs and lives with his “emergency orders”.
Sununu’s edicts have invaded our homes and businesses, so now we’re invading his. It’s been a long time coming and today was a lot of fun as we joined together from across NH. Sununu’s gubernatorial primary challenger, Nobody, was in attendance and purchased hundreds of dollars worth of pizza for the crowd on the cold, late-fall afternoon. Ten-year-old Lucas, who earlier had been calling out Sununu on a megaphone, grabbed a pizza and attempted to walk it up the driveway to offer it to the multiple state police officers that had been assigned to protect “HIS EXCELLENCY”. They told him to leave the property, as is shown in this highlights video by Vincent Moore from Shire Free Media:
Also, when the Domino’s driver pulled up, he had on a mask but removed it and smiled as he received plenty of cash tips from the excited attendees. It was a great day for us, but probably not for Sununu as he hid inside his home like the cowardly, sniveling politician he is.
Over the weeks running up to the election, desperate pro-police supporters have been stealing Aria DiMezzo for Sheriff campaign signs from around Cheshire county. DiMezzo reports over 150 signs – over half of the approximately 250 signs she had out – have been stolen at a cost to her of over $1,000. Keene Police have received reports from people who witnessed some of the brazen thefts. At Tuesday’s general election, she was defeated by incumbent sheriff Eli Rivera. According to the wildly inaccurate numbers from the Secretary of State, 17% of voters chose DiMezzo, but we’re not real sure how over 7,000 votes were registered for Rivera in Westmoreland where there are not even 1,700 people supposedly living there. So it’s likely her real results were closer to 20%.
It’s ironic that the police supporters, who surely would describe themselves as “law and order” people, are committing theft and potentially facing up to a year in jail per sign stolen and up to $1,000 fines. If the amount stolen hits over a thousand dollars, felony theft charges are possible. DiMezzo however did not call the police regarding the thefts, opting instead to post surveillance video of two of the criminals from outside her church parsonage on Route 101 in Keene. You can see those videos here and here. If you can identify the men in the videos, please contact Aria.
Yard Signs Available via Aria4Sheriff.com
On October 10th, Keene Police’s James Cemorelis reached out to Aria regarding a man in a grey truck witnessed stealing multiple DiMezzo campaign signs in Keene, asking for her personal information for a report he was working on. She declined to provide the information, telling him she did not wish to pursue charges, though she did confirm the takings were unauthorized and said the attack had affected nearly every sign of hers on the highways and even some private property, finally thanking Cemorelis for his great work. Cemorelis subsequently has closed the investigation.
Hers is probably the most successful pro-liberty campaign to happen so far due to the New Hampshire Freedom Migration. While others have been elected across New Hampshire, none of them had the major media coverage DiMezzo received including multiple international press outlets and over forty interviews including multiple leftist podcasts. It’s likely many millions of people became aware of DiMezzo and her principled pro-liberty message of police accountability. It was the perfect campaign for the year 2020 where more people are paying attention to the criminal, corrupt, and violent acts of the police and she was the ideal candidate. All the right things came together at the right time. Thank you to everyone who helped with publicizing her message. Stay tuned here to Free Keene to see what she decides to do next. Also, if you haven’t read the excellent posts on her blog, I recommend them. She is also selling autographed leftover campaign signs, so get yours before they are sold out!
Christopher Sununu’s home at 71 Hemlock Ct in Newfields, NH
Keene activists have a history of protests at corrupt bureaucrats’ homes. Now we’re going to the tyrant king himself, with likely dozens of others from across New Hampshire. Chris Sununu, referred to as “HIS EXCELLENCY” in the dozens of “orders” he’s issued in 2020, has now released “Emergency Order #74“. This latest diktat has imposed a statewide mask mandate:
Beginning on November 20, 2020, all persons over the age of 5 within the State of New Hampshire shall wear a mask or cloth face covering over their noses and mouths any time they are in public spaces, indoors or outdoors, where they are unable to or do not consistently maintain a physical distance of at least six feet from persons outside their own households.
While the order does include large loopholes for medical and other exemptions, Sununu’s orders have always included ways out for those paying attention. But most people just believe what the media tells them or that they hear through the rumor mill. They don’t actually read the orders. How could they? There are dozens of them and legalese is purposefully difficult to comprehend.
A select few are pushing back here in Keene, but despite being sued in federal court by a heroic Keene restaurant over his previous mask mandate on groups of over a hundred people, Sununu has doubled down and mandated masks statewide. Some are saying that there is no penalty, so no big deal. These people are uninformed. There does not need to be a penalty in each “emergency order”. In a previous executive order, #65, Sununu proclaims: “Violations of any Emergency Order, rule, or regulation issued under the State of Emergency are subject to the penalty provision under RSA 21-P:47.”, which says “If any person violates or attempts to violate any order, rule, or regulation made pursuant to this subdivision, such person shall be guilty of a misdemeanor.” While the entire concept of “emergency powers” is likely unconstitutional, I don’t know if anyone has ever challenged the enabling statute, RSA 4:47, in court, so it stands.
We will not obey.
Occasionally this year, there had been discussion among activists of a protest at Sununu’s home, but the support never really galvanized like it has now. Sununu’s new mask mandate was the final straw for those who erroneously hoped that he was going to change for the better for some reason now that he won re-election. Any such illusion has been wiped away as “HIS EXCELLENCY” has decreed over-and-over again various provisions making New Hampshire very much like Maskachusetts. As a result of his latest step towards crushing the souls of the good people of New Hampshire, people are finally standing up and moving the protests from the state house in Concord, to Sununu’s home in 71 Hemlock Ct, Newfields, NH.
The first event of what may be a series is expected to take place at 2pm this Sunday November 22nd. Creative signs are welcome and “Absolute Defiance” has also called for pots and pans to be banged. It will be the first time in the nearly fifteen years I’ve been here that I’ve ever heard of liberty activists targeting the “governor” at home. It’s historic.
Some will inevitably complain, “Oh his poor wife and children. It’s not fair to punish them for Sununu’s bad deeds. Just keep your protests to his office in Concord and other public appearances!” To them, I say: “HIS EXCELLENCY” and his precious orders have ruined countless businesses and lives. He’s put people out of good jobs with his “guidance” that is written and enforced as threats of violence. He’s not just suggesting people listen to him, he’s demanding it. He’s invading our private property and lives and it’s only fair we bring the consequences to his doorstep. If his wife Valerie doesn’t like our freedom of speech, maybe she should have a talk with her husband in the way only a wife can and tell him to stop hurting peaceful people.
One of the strengths of cryptocurrency like Bitcoin is its open, decentralized nature. The code itself is open source, as released by the anonymous “Satoshi Nakamoto” back in 2009. Anyone can “fork the code” – copy it and create their own cryptocurrency, tweaking the software however one wants. This has been done many thousands of times in the last decade and has resulted in an overwhelming number of cryptocurrencies, many of which are very interesting to speculate about but have very little real-life relevance. Bitcoin (BTC), far and away is still the king-of-the-hill of crypto.
In 2017, for the first time ever, a different kind of fork happened with Bitcoin. This one happened internally and contentiously. Some history: In 2017, Bitcoin’s network was full of transactions, just like it is today. Similar to recent months, network fees then were rising dramatically as people looking to send transactions as quickly as possible bid up the fees to ridiculous levels. For instance, within the last week, I paid about $10 worth of BTC to send a transaction. This is CRAZY expensive for sending crypto, which shouldn’t cost more than one or two cents or even less.
The Bitcoin programmers and community could not come to an agreement on how to scale up Bitcoin to meet demand and keep the fees low. One side offered a simple solution they said was Satoshi’s original vision – increase the block size. The block size is a technical term describing the number of bytes maximum that a “block” can be when it’s “mined” onto the “blockchain”. The blockchain being the major innovation that makes Bitcoin such an important development – it’s a public ledger of all the Bitcoin transactions that have occurred since the beginning. The blockchain is decentralized and distributed. There are thousands of copies of it across the world. This distribution is why Bitcoin cannot be taken down by world governments – it exists in too many places at once.
Anyway, when Satoshi created Bitcoin, there was no limit on block size. Later, Satoshi added a block size of one megabyte apparently without telling anyone. Satoshi later disappeared from public view and hasn’t been seen since. Why did Satoshi add the limit? There is speculation, but apparently Satoshi never explained it. Regardless, it exists and some in the Bitcoin community say it should be raised. The larger the block size, the more transactions can be fit in a block, which are generally mined onto the blockchain roughly every ten minutes. More transactions per block means more transaction volume can be handled at once and therefore, lower network fees. Simple, right?
Bitcoin mining doesn’t actually look like this.
Unfortunately, not everyone agreed. Another group was against the raising of the block size, instead proposing much more complex ideas including “Segregated Witness” and “Lightning Network” as solutions. I don’t have the ability to explain them, so I won’t try. Suffice it to say, they implemented “Segregated Witness” and its effect on the network fees was completely unremarkable. The much ballyhooed “Lightning Network” is still in development, so the jury is out on that. The two sides could not come to an agreement, so for the first time in its history, on August 1st of 2017, Bitcoin (BTC) had a “chain fork” aka “chain split” and Bitcoin Cash (BCH) was born. Instantly, everyone who had Bitcoin (BTC) also had the same amount of the then-new Bitcoin Cash (BCH). I prefer to call the event a schism however, because outside the technical aspects, from the human perspective, a chain split resembles a religious schism. Two groups of people, who previously agreed, come to irreconcilable differences, and go their separate ways. Whether political, sports, or crypto – human nature appears to be very tribal. For better or for worse.
Are we better off or worse off for having Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Bitcoin (BTC)? It depends on your perspective. I think it would have been better if the BTC programmers just increased the block size, fixing the problem of the full network and the ridiculous fees. Unfortunately they would not do this, and so Bitcoin Cash had to happen. However, the increased competition has done nothing to get Bitcoin’s programmers to fix the problem, meanwhile, network fees for sending Bitcoin (BTC) are on the rise – just like happened in 2017. Just one week ago, the average fee was over $10! As I write this, it’s over $6. Most people buying Bitcoin (BTC) are unaware of the insane fees, because they are buying on sites like Coinbase and apps like Cash App and if they never move the funds off those platforms, they never experience the insane network fee, so to them it’s an investment vehicle, not money.
In fact, this now-common viewpoint about Bitcoin (BTC) – that it is a “store of value” rather than “electronic cash” was not always the case and has been cultivated by its supporters in recent years. Satoshi’s whitepaper was clear. Bitcoin was supposed to be electronic cash, which also is a store of value. For years, Bitcoin’s network fees – paid by the sender – were no more than a penny’s worth of BTC per transaction. There are some interesting theories that suggest old-money companies like Mastercard via its membership in the “Digital Currency Group” are funding key Bitcoin programmers by investing in a company called Blockstream, who put those programmers on its payroll several years ago, after which all the trouble started. Another investor of Blockstream is AXA Group, a massive global bank. Satoshi created Bitcoin to undermine the old money institutions like Mastercard and big bankers like AXA, but now they are funding its key developers?
Which will be the “true” Bitcoin Cash?
Whether its through a conspiracy to make Bitcoin less useful in the marketplace or just the inaction that sometimes can result from being the king-of-the-hill, Bitcoin has not been fixed. It’s still broken due to network congestion driving up the fees. Bitcoin Cash (BCH) is a much more useful alternative than Bitcoin, primarily because its network fees are what they should be, around one cent’s worth of BCH. Of course, plenty of cryptos have low fees, like DASH, but Bitcoin Cash has had the staying power to keep in the top ten while DASH – once as high ranked as #5 by market cap, has fallen down the charts.
Unlike DASH, however, Bitcoin Cash’s existence so far – behind the scenes – has been somewhat dramatic. DASH has never had a chain split, but Bitcoin Cash had its first in November of 2018, just over a year after it came into existence as I described above. Bitcoin Cash has regular upgrades every six months that require a “hard fork” of the currency. A “hard fork” means that all users must upgrade their software to continue to use the network, whereas a “soft fork” is a software upgrade that is optional and backwards-compatible with previous versions. Hard forks are an ideal time for disagreeing parties to attempt a chain split and create a new competitor and so in November 2018, a group led by an Australian man claiming – without evidence – to be Satoshi Nakamoto, decided they were going to have themselves a schism and “Bitcoin Satoshi’s Vision” aka Bitcoin SV (BSV) was created from the Bitcoin Cash chain. This was the first time Bitcoin Cash had a schism of its own. However, it may not be the last.
I apologize for all the backstory, but I feel it’s necessary to tell it in that detail to bring new users up to speed on why things are happening. This electronic cash is like nothing we’ve ever seen before and there is a learning curve. As a founder of Bitcoin Embassy New Hampshire, I don’t want people to be in the dark if they don’t want to be, and a little bit of knowledge is useful to those willing to learn. Sure, you can ignore all this stuff and probably everything will be fine, but there is a chance of some confusing things happening, and so we bring our story to the current day:
Two years after Bitcoin Cash schisming into Bitcoin Cash (BCH) and Bitcoin SV (BSV), Bitcoin Cash is once again facing another looming chain split on November 15th. Plus, it’s looking like the possible drama-factor could be higher than ever. What’s happening this time? Bitcoin Cash’s most visible programmer, Amaury Sechet, has called for an “upgrade” to send 8% of the mining rewards to the Bitcoin Cash programmers. Mining rewards go to the miner who successfully “mines” a given block to the blockchain. The rewards are currently made up of the 6.25 BCH “block reward” that are “mined” into existence with each block and the total amount of transaction fees collected for that block’s transactions. Normally miners keep 100% of the mining rewards, but Sechet’s proposal changes that to 92%. So far, the miners who are currently mining are signalling their opposition to the planned “upgrade”, so there’s a chance it won’t get off the ground and nothing will change.
Cointelegraph’s Artist’s Interpretation of a Bitcoin Hash War
However, the supporters of the 8% programmers’ fee could turn on a bunch of mining power on the day of the possible split and then it could actually happen. The supporters of the 8% fee are being referred to in various places as “Bitcoin Cash ABC” (BCHA) and they have their own software. The opposition, who are running different software, are referred to frequently as “Bitcoin Cash Node” (BCHN). Neither of those names are particularly catchy, but the important thing to note here, is both of these camps are going to be fighting over the name “Bitcoin Cash”. Because crypto is decentralized, it will be up to the market to decide. In recent days, various exchanges and other cryptocurrency service providers have been announcing their plans on how they will be handling the possible schism. As you might imagine, it’s a patchwork. Many are preemptively choosing a winner and siding with BCHN. Others are saying they will be watching the situation closely and awarding the “Bitcoin Cash” (BCH) moniker and ticker symbol to whichever chain wins the mining “hash war” that could occur, based on various factors.
It wasn’t really a big deal when Bitcoin SV split off from Bitcoin Cash, as Bitcoin SV never tried to call itself “Bitcoin Cash”, so as confusing as chain splits are to the new user, at least there wasn’t confusion in naming. Now with two competing groups vying for the Bitcoin Cash name, the potential for confusion is very high. So what can you do if you have Bitcoin Cash (BCH)? Here are some possible options:
Do nothing. If the chain splits, some wallets will support both chains. A chain split means whatever amount of BCH you have at the time of the split, you’ll get the exact same amount of the newly split coin, whatever your wallet decides to call it. Unless your wallet won’t be supporting one of them, in which case you technically still have the new coins, but may have to move your balance to a wallet that is supporting the split to see both balances.
Sell off your BCH and avoid the whole thing. If you sell before the possible split, you avoid any drama but also avoid the possible benefit of having both new BCH competitors after the possible split.
Move all your BCH to the same wallet. If you’re expecting a chain split and have BCH in more than one wallet, you may want to move it all together to the same wallet before the 15th, preferably a wallet that is planning to support both coins.
Move all your BCH to an exchange. Note, it’s risky to hold crypto on an exchange. That said, if you want to get both coins at the time of the possible schism and have the immediate ability to trade away the coins you don’t want, you ought to send your BCH to an exchange that will be supporting both split coins, like Coinex.
Whatever you decide to do, you may want to do it before November 15th as many wallets, exchanges, and other services will be freezing all BCH transactions as November 15th gets closer, in preparation for the possible schism. Also, if the chain split occurs and a new BCH competitor is born, the new coin will not have what is called “replay protection” and the “replay attack” will be possible. This makes it dangerous to send BCH transactions until wallet providers can update their software to ensure safety or until the coins themselves add replay protection. It would be wise to be patient after a chain fork, don’t move your funds, and stay connected to the crypto community to learn more as it develops.
If you’re in the Monadnock region of New Hampshire, please join our Telegram chat and our Meetup group. If you have any questions it’s always a good idea to crowdsource the answers as in situations like this, opinions can range. No one is an expert and no one can predict what might happen.
I hope you found this article informative and thank you for reading this far. Good luck with the fork – if it even happens!