Border Patrol Agent Salutes Camera at NH Internal Oppressive Checkpoint
On Friday, several Forkfest 2018 attendees drove an hour South of Roger’s Campground to I-93 around Woodstock, NH – the site of the repeating temporary internal Border Patrol immigration checkpoints. Based on activist reports, the checkpoint appeared to have been operating that day from noon until 7pm. As is typical of these checkpoints, they were stopping every car to ask occupants if they are “US Citizens“. They also had a dog they were walking up and down the line of waiting cars.
As it turns out, a car full of people with video cameras wasn’t welcome in their secondary screening area. After one agent orders me to pull into their secondary screening for refusing to answer questions, his commanding officer intervenes before I can even cross over a single lane of traffic, and even apologizes for not wasting more of our time with their invasive screening! In hindsight, I should have told him to apologize to all the cars without camera-toting occupants for wasting everyone’s time with their oppressive police state checkpoint. Here’s the ridiculous video:
No one in the car was planning to answer the agents’ questions, given one has a right to remain silent (that the US Supreme Court has now required be invoked in police encounters). Obedience to tyrants only encourages them. Besides, as someone who believes in liberty, I don’t believe in government borders. Peaceful people should be allowed to enter a free country. Of course, we all know by now the United States is not a free country, and in fact has been dropping on the various international freedom rankings.
Also this weekend, NH Libertarian Party candidate for US Congress NH-2, Justin O’Donnell also traversed the checkpoint while live streaming to facebook. His friend in the passenger seat obediently answered the agent’s inquiry while O’Donnell debated with the agents, ultimately admitting to having been born in Boston, MA. Prior to this, the agent threatened to detain O’Donnell until he answered the question. (more…)
Attorney Dan Hynes, also an A+ rated state representative by the New Hampshire Liberty Alliance, appeared in the New Hampshire Supreme Court on Thursday morning and pointed out the absurdity of prohibiting female toplessness, absolutely eviscerating the city of Laconia’s clearly discriminatory ban. In contrast, the state’s attorney actually argued that it was an issue of morality as she simultaneously admitted that a woman could wear pasties over her nipples and then it would be legal, even if the pasties were printed photos of nipples!
Are there really people who believe that the sight of nipples on a woman is immoral, but because it’s legal to cover them with photos of nipples, then it’s now moral?
Further, what exactly is immoral about female nipples being shown in public?
In case you missed it, here’s the original Free the Nipple trial from the original Gilford arrests (the case prior to this one, where the ladies won at the district court level). Hynes does an excellent job and the entire thing is pretty entertaining: (more…)
Only five DJVCS posters exist – one will be raffled at the screening!
Recently Derrick J Freeman announced a special five-year anniversary screening of his documentary film, “Derrick J’s Victimless Crime Spree” to take place in Portsmouth this Sunday 9/17 at 7pm at the Seacoast Repertory Theatre. Admission is free, first come, first seated. Refreshments will be available for cash, bitcoin, or DASH. If you’re new to Victimless Crime Spree, it’s a feature length, 90min documentary that was originally recorded and edited in Keene, NH (with a little footage from Derrick’s previous home of Philadelphia). Here’s how Derrick has described the movie from his perspective today which he included this on the facebook event for Sunday’s screening:
Victimless Crime Spree is the story of Derrick J, a lovable rebel on a mission to achieve freedom and independence from government. He moves from Philadelphia to New Hampshire for the Free State Project and almost immediately finds himself behind bars. Despite his friendliness to the cops and government bureaucrats, they keep putting him in cages. Inspirational, intelligent and fearless; this documentary demonstrates the will and perseverance of civil disobedience activists that risk their liberty for hope of a better world. If you don’t already, this movie will leave you questioning your relationship with “authority.”
After the screening, we’ll have a Q&A with Derrick J and also do a raffle for one of only five existing original theatrical release posters from the movie’s theatrical premiere in Keene back in September of 2012.
Since its release, the movie has racked up more than 175,000 views on YouTube, sold hundreds of DVDs, and received plenty of positive reviews and ratings, with an 8.6/10 on IMDB and 4.3 stars on Amazon! Those aren’t the only measures of the movie’s success, however. It’s also accomplished helping turn libertarians on to the NH Freedom Migration and multiple people have cited it as their reason for moving to New Hampshire. It’s also introduced new people to the ideas of liberty. I really couldn’t be more proud of what Derrick and editor Beau Davis created and am honored to be the film’s executive producer.
Whether you’re new to the movie or are a longtime fan, we’ll look forward to seeing you at the Seacoast Rep in Portsmouth at 7pm this Sunday, September 17th for this special theatrical presentation. Bring a friend! If you can’t make it on Sunday, you can always watch it for free online anytime or hold your own screening where you live!
Finally, if you’re around Portsmouth a little earlier in the day, be sure to stop into Derrick’s new “Free State Bitcoin Shoppe” as they are having their grand opening from 12p-6p!
This is a crime? – Hampton Beach “Free the Nipple”, 2015
Today was the day of the latest “Free the Nipple” trial in New Hampshire’s Laconia district court. Though the ladies who protested the nipple ban in 2015 were found not guilty after a hilarious trial that I captured on video, this time around three of the ladies were found guilty for a topless event that happened in Laconia early in 2016. Both seemingly conflicting verdicts were given by the same judge. The ladies and their attorney intend to appeal.
Unfortunately I was not there to record today’s trial due to a car breakdown. I was told it was a very short event, as all the testimony in the case was given by the witnesses in a prior hearing in October on a motion by defense attorney Dan Hynes to dismiss the case. Thankfully, Free Keene blogger and legal expert Melanie Johnson was at the original hearing in October to take notes.
Though the very same judge, James M Carroll found the ladies who were topless in 2015 in Gilford not guilty on a technicality because NH is not a “home rule” state, this time he found the Laconia ladies guilty! Heidi Lilley, Kia Sinclair, and Ginger Pierro were sentenced to a $100 fine suspended given 12 months of good behavior.
Judge James M Carroll of Laconia District Court
In November of 2016 Carroll denied Hynes’ motion to dismiss saying that Laconia prosecutors had found an “enabling statute” that allowed the city to ban toplessness.
Since New Hampshire is not a “home rule” state, cities and towns are only supposed to be allowed to make things illegal that they’ve been enabled to prohibit specifically by the state legislature. According to the Concord Monitor’s Nick Reid, the prosecutors argued that RSA 47:17:XIII grants the town the right to regulate female toplessness. The statute does say that cities and towns can,
“regulate the times and places of bathing and swimming in the canals, rivers and other waters of the city, and the clothing to be worn by bathers and swimmers.”
Attorney Hynes, who is also a state representative, told me he’s disappointed in the court’s decision and intends to file an appeal with the NH supreme court. He’s previously stated the statute is unconstitutional and that he doesn’t believe banning female toplessness was the legislature’s intention. He says he’ll also be supporting legislation in 2018 to repeal the statute in question. Stay tuned here to Free Keene for the latest for this important equal rights case.
I was eating dinner with my boyfriend in our kitchen watching a Facebook live stream debate about guns on campus at the University of Texas when suddenly the video stopped. A pop up said something like, “Session expired.”
Someone reported a photo of me my friends at the beach as nudity, and Facebook responded by restricting my ability to communicate with you on their platform in two ways. I can not post on my wall or respond to messages using Messenger for the next 3 days.
I feel sad that I can’t use Facebook. It is the primary way I communicate with the world. Especially the Messenger app. An acquaintance I met at a conference asked me a question, and I am not able to respond. I am not even able to explain why I can’t respond. That is embarrassing and frustrating. I want to maintain a good reputation with this new friend, but I can’t respond to him, and he doesn’t know that I can’t. Fortunately I have been using Signal, Telegram, and other messaging apps, so I am still largely able to communicate. (more…)
Did facebook silently delete the news about the topless ban proposal going down in flames? The evidence says yes. The original Free Keene post to facebook has mysteriously disappeared, which means that the nearly 1,000 people who liked and shared it prior to its deletion have all had their shares disappear from their pages.
Presuming the original post was reported by some prudes (despite having a “safe” preview pic), shame on facebook for not even letting us know of the removal.
So yeah, that confirms it. Facebook sent the censored preview photo to a blacklist of some sort, so one can still share the original article’s link on facebook, but no preview pic will come up.
Should you wish to share the story again on facebook, here’s what you have to do to make it a little tougher for the prudes to attack:
Then, once the pic is uploaded – type in whatever you want for the post, and drop in the link to the article.
That’s it!
Facebook never should have blacklisted the already-censored preview pic – it’s been posted countless times before and does not show any areola. I specifically made that version with facebook in mind, which should be obvious given the graphic used to censor. The pic in question has been attached to other articles that have been shared a lot on facebook, so WTF? If you try to share the link to the pic via a facebook post, it does give you a link to report their decision as wrong, which I did, and you are welcome to do as well. I have no idea if it will make a difference.
