New Hampshire Judge: Elbit Systems Is A Victim (And, Incidentally, My Supervisor)

Screen grab from WHDH coverage March 22 inside the police station in Merrimack 

The remaining seven defendants of eight arrested for criminal trespass at Elbit Systems in Merrimack, New Hampshire were arraigned yesterday in district court. Original conditions of bail noted on their paperwork when they were released from custody March 22 were to avoid excessive drinking (?!) and stay away from Elbit in Merrimack. 

When Bruce Gagnon was arraigned April 2, the prosecutor asked the judge to also ban him from an Elbit facility in Massachusetts. The judge declined, saying it was outside his jurisdiction.

Yesterday's judge, Mark Derby, decided that not only is Massachusetts within his jurisdiction, but so is the whole U.S. of A! Now, my husband and the other six defendants have as a condition of bail the need to stay away from Elbit facilities anywhere in the country. (My husband: What about in England?)

Yesterday, defendants who appeared in court pointed out that this violated the prior precedent and prior statements about being outside the NH court's jurisdiction, but Judge Derby responded: "That other judge from April 2 is not my supervisor!" 

My comment: Maybe not, but apparently Elbit Systems is.

Another fun quote from prosecutor Jason Moore and re-stated by the judge: "Elbit Systems has been the victim of these protests in numerous states. If Elbit Systems was a human being, we would want to protect them in other states too, not just New Hampshire."

Screen grab from ABC News

This is the kind of twisted logic where attackers are victims, and any protest of the aggressors is coded in the corporate press as "antisemitic". Cue the reporting on the allegedly enormous rise in antisemitic incidents since October 2023. Note to journalists: many of those involved in, for example, occupying Columbia University yesterday to call for divestment from companies like Elbit that profit from Israel's genocide in Palestine, are themselves Jewish. This is also true of Elbit protesters from Maine.

The defendants will be back in court on June 6 at 9:30am for a Trial Management Conference i.e. disposition hearing. This is where the court determines if a deal has been reached between prosecutors and defendants, and if not issues the orders to proceed to trial on another day.

Since several people I love were arrested blocking access for a day to the alleged victim, the biggest genocide profiteer on the planet, I've been subscribing to the NH Union Leader newspaper. And their daily email allows me to check their top headlines.

Yesterday's arraignment did not make the cut, however, I found this item to be interesting. Resistance is everywhere! 

Senate ships Defend the Guard bill off to study

Guard adjutant general warned N.H. could lose $400 million in federal aid if legislation blocking deployment of his troops in an undeclared war passes.

By Kevin Landrigan

Union Leader Staff

CONCORD — The state Senate on Thursday summarily sidelined a controversial bill that would have prevented the deployment of New Hampshire Army or Air National Guard troops to serve in combat during undeclared wars.

Adjutant Gen. David Mikolaities had warned that passage of the Defend the Guard Act (HB 229) could have put nearly $400 million in federal grants at risk.

After no debate, the Senate shipped the bill off to interim study by voice vote.

Even if senators chose to work on the legislation, the move means it would have to start over as a new bill in 2025.

Sen. Lou D’Allesandro, DManchester, said the testimony of many deployed veterans, frustrated about being sent to different military theaters, made an impression on him.

“These men and women are being deployed all over the world, and they are not very happy campers,” D’Allesandro said. “To me it’s a clear indication that our armed forces are dependent on the Guard, and these folks are wondering why we’re always having to be deployed.”

The State Veterans Advisory Committee, Deputy Adj. Gen. Warren Perry and Mikolaities convinced the Senate that the agency could ill afford to have this bill become law, he said.

“The Guard is performing a critical mission for our country, so anything that could threaten financial support for it has to be of great concern,” D’Allesandro said. “The guard becomes even more critical as the traditional armed forces continue to fall short of meeting their goals for recruitment of soldiers. It’s a huge problem.”

The bill was authored by Rep. Tom Mannion, R-Pelham, a Marine Corps veteran twice deployed into combat during the war in Iraq.

“It’s a massive disappointment that the Republican-majority Senate voted against their own party platform by quietly killing Defend the Guard,” Mannion said.

“They have chosen to continue with the status quo of sending the men and women of our state’s guard unit into overseas combat, instead of pushing back against the war machine in D.C. and making Congress do its constitutional duty.” If reelected, Mannion vowed, he will return with his bill next year.

“New Hampshire has a strong history of opposing the forever wars in the Middle East, and the voters will make their displeasure known this fall,” Mannion said.

After the vote, Senate President Jeb Bradley, R-Wolfeboro, said he understood the passion behind this measure.

“Some folks have quite frankly gotten sick and tired of endless wars, but defunding the national guard is not the appropriate response,” said the former congressman.

The legislation was first brought forward in early 2023.

Squeaked through House

Rep. Michael Moffett, R-Loudon, who chairs the House State-Federal Relations and Veteran Affairs Committee, said he was opposed to the measure at first, “but many veterans turned out who were very passionate about this issue and I felt I had to respond to that,” Moffett said.

“Our military has been used too often in the name of national security.”[emphasis mine]

Keep reading