July 12, 2009

The Hudson, NH Rally to Protest Illegal Immigration

Yesterday, I attended a rally to protest illegal immigration in Hudson, NH. The event was sponsored by North East White Pride, a group organized to spread awareness of the harm that current government policy is causing to White America and to get local people involved in the struggle against the policy-makers who are imposing these policies on us.

I arrived a few minutes early and because my fellows had not arrived, but many counter-protesters already had, I decided to talk to them and see if we could find any common ground. I was hoping we could at least agree that Whites do have a right to speak freely about the issues that concern us. I was pleasantly surprised at the results. With a few exceptions, they were all very friendly and open to the things I was saying.

I first addressed two young people holding a banner. They politely said that they were only there to support friends who had invited them and weren't prepared to talk about the issues. A woman, Vivian McGuire, who identified herself as a Jew, immediately flew into a frenzy at my questions. She ranted incoherently about how Israelis had the right to ethnically cleanse Palestinians (seriously, she said this) from their (the Palestinians) homeland of Palestine, but that Whites had no expectation of having ethnically or racially homogeneous countries or even communities of their own. She ranted some more about how I was a NaziWhoWantedToKillSixMillionJews, until her husband stepped in front of her and told her to calm down and quit acting so irrationally. He further told her that I had been exceedingly polite and amicable and there was no reason for her to continue ranting.

He then turned to me and introduced himself as Kevin. I gave him my name, we shook hands and had a short, very congenial, discussion. We found that we were in agreement on many positions, particularly about the repeated abrogations of our constitutionally protected rights, especially those centering on the first amendment - like the freedom of association that Whites - and Whites only - have been stripped of by the Civil Rights Act. While we were speaking, his wife continued with her irrational behavior and she was joined in this by a women (of indeterminate race), who kept babbling incoherently about her two black children. Several other people, very civilly, added their two-bits and after a while we shook hands and parted amicably. (Although Vivian and the other women followed me, still ranting).

During this conversation, the Amerasian photographer for the Nashua Telegraph, Corey Perrine, was taking photos and as I walked away stopped me to ask questions. While we spoke he related to me briefly, that he was half Korean and half German and that he would not like it if (either) Korea was being flooded by foreigners in the way that America and the other White countries are being destroyed by out-of-control mass immigration.

During our discussion, the Telegraph's journalist, Albert McKeon, assigned to cover the rally, asked if I would grant him an interview. I told him that, in my experience, the corporate media outlets always skew their stories in a manner that is clearly biased against Whites and that if he promised to present my answers as I gave them and not "spin" them I would grant him the interview. He promised to do so. We talked for about five minutes and I gave him the basics of what I perceive to be the foundation of the White Rights movement. During this time he appeared to agree with much of what I was saying. His story was published today, and unfortunately, he misrepresented most of what I had to say.

As I continued toward my group, I stopped to talk to a small group of antis. I conversed with three middle-aged White women, who all clearly had "issues" with men. The gist of the discussion was that women should have he right to choose to do anything they want no matter how destructive to them, men, children, or society in generally and that society should continue to force men to pay for those choices. For example, one of them volunteered that she stood for "a women's right to choose." I asked her if she was equally supportive of a man's right to choose. She looked confused as if the idea that men should have any choices was completely foreign to her. I then clarified my question by asking her if she felt that a man should have a right to a "paper abortion." In other words, since an abortion is basically the right of a women to determine for herself whether or not she is ready to have a child and raise it until the age of 18 (and beyond), then a man should have the same right and be able to get an abortion-in-law which would basically be a legal procedure in which he could divest all interest and responsibility in a child that he felt he was not prepared to care for, for the next 18 years of his life. She, of course, said no she did not support a man's right to choose that option.

Our discussion went on for a while in this vein, until I excused myself and walked over to my companions. Albert Mckeon joined us and interviewed both of my companions and then came over to me and we talked, off the record, about the political situation, in America today, with him agreeing with much of what I had to say. This is why his inaccurate relating of our interview was so disappointing. Eventually, Kevin came over and talked for awhile, saying that he felt maybe he was "standing on the wrong side of the street." In other words, he thought he should be protesting with us and not the antis. He then said he was going to the 7-11 across the way and asked us if we wanted anything. Later he brought back drinks.

Vivian and her crazy friend came over and started insulting us (which we never stooped to at any point), after awhile they realized they were making fools of themselves and they walked away.

At 2:45 pm there were three of us and approximately 15-20 of them. About half the people driving by honked, waved, gave us the thumbs up, or gave us the finger. I would estimate that of those that reacted to us, 80-85% were positive and the rest disagreed. Most of those that were angry were non-White, vulgar, and rude. I did not see the counter-protesters (although they had a much larger presence) get any significant attention - good or bad - with the exception of one fella who identified himself as American Indian and excoriated the young couple holding the banner for flying a flag that was not the Stars and Stripes.

By 4pm the counter-protesters' numbers had dwindled by half and we were still holding strong at three protesters and getting more responses from the passers-by. At 4:30 four more of our number arrived and they (the antis) were down to two, both of whom left about 15 minutes later. My conversations with them seemed to discourage them. I think that years of media indoctrination that all Whites, who believe Whites should have rights in their own countries and be able to speak openly about how they feel regarding the anti-White policies that have been imposed on us, are really neo-Nazi, racists caused them to be expecting a representative of the White Rights movement to be vulgar and threatening and when I turned out to be pleasant and reasonable they decided there was really no reason to be standing on the side of the road protesting us.

Overall the rally was a success and I think showed that there is much concern on the part of Whites regarding the Illegal Invasion of our country. Hopefully we can restore integrity to our southern border and then be able to focus our attention on all of the other problems that "diversity" is causing for White America.


George Russell said...


I am George Russell, I host the morning drive radio program Morning Liftoff on WSMN 1590 in Nashua. 6-10am M-F.
Please email me: george@morningliftoff.com
I would like you to be able to give your side of the rally on my show.

Thank you in advance.

Anonymous said...

Great report! It's sad that those against illegal immigration can at least recognize the right of folks to protest against our views, while they can't seem to understand that we also have the right to hold and express our views.

Russell A. James said...

Hello Anon,

We just need to keep on plugging. Our cause is just and we shall prevail.

Brittanicus said...


Brittanicus said...


Don't believe for one minute, we are out of the quicksand yet? The illegal immigration enforcement battle has just began. Starting when Senate Leader Harry Reid, Speaker Nancy Pelosi and even President Obama begin their devious manipulating when the amendments enter closed door sessions. Our victories may have seemed successful and closed, but it now enter the dark domain of the conference committees. This is where our laws and brought and sold by the highest bidders, because the vicious cycle comes with open border, the free traders who have already been lobbying hard and have large war chests. Sen. Jim DeMint (R-SC) authored the completion of 700-miles of fencing along the southwest border, not just pathetic vehicular barriers and a virtual barrier.

Sen. Jeff Sessions (R-Ala.) that would require all federal contractors to check the eligibility of new hires through E-Verify. Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.) tried to table the amendment, but the motion was defeated. The amendment also calls for a permanent reauthorization of E-Verify, which is set to expire in September.Sen. Charles Grassley's (R-Iowa) E-Verify amendment to the Homeland Security spending bill allows employers to check the workplace eligibility of all employees--NOT JUST NEW HIRES. Sen. David Vitter's (R-La.) No-Match amendment prevents further delay in the implementation of a Bush Administration rule allowing the Social Security to send No-Match letters to employers.

All the anti-sovereignty, pro-illegal immigrant groups are already swallowing their own bile, but will be on the doorstep on the Congress in the following days. The American people must be vigilant against many organization, who not only want to squash E-Verify completely, but de-construct the border wall. Council of Foreign Relations wants no barriers between the North American countries, so it doesn't inhibit the free movement of cheap labor. The US Chamber of Commerce seems to believe American workers should be in competition with anybody who climbs the border wall? Who would ever think trade unions such as AFL-CIO, would in their leadership condone illegal labor in their membership. ACLU group like many others are secretly financed by taxpayer dollars, as is LA Raza and other radical organizations. If we didn't have the bloggers and a moderate media, the public would be left unaware of the weakening of ICE RAIDS, 287(g) police enforcement the REAL ID ACT.

Almost every law on the books that includes 287(g) for local enforcement is always weakened or even snuffed out by political conspirators. Any activist knows whose behind annulling the 287(g) police questioning, arrest and detain of illegal aliens? Our lady at the Homeland Security office, Madam Janet Napolitano. She keeps opening her mouth and with a forked tongue, swears she adamantly supported E-Verify and other programs, while secretly she and her minions underfund working laws, just as she did when she was governor of Arizona? Sheriff Joe Ariapo showed most of these genuflecting elected officials the door, and he certainly has major backing of voters in Maricopa county. They have had enough of spreading crime and utter indifference to American law.

Their is a commitment by the Catholic church to undermine federal immigration laws, that is outrageous and they should lose the tax exempt status. But remember that although the coming AMNESTY is a disastrous crisis, the following waves of illegal potential squatters will be our Armageddon. The acceleration towards the genesis of Overpopulation. If we allow the politicians to enact another immigration reform program, it will become a calamity as was the 1986 AMNESTY.

Anonymous said...

Many people are confused by the word "antis" as it really is not a word and is automatically pronounced in the head while reading as ant'iss.
I think that the more descriptive and accurate word, anti-White, will do more to get our message across.
I hope you continue with this work.
Thank you.

Anonymous said...

Actually Russell, my response was I said I wanted to interview you and not you interview me. I never said anything about my official opinion on Korea. I was there to cover your story. I was there to reflect what I saw. The image you said that misrepresented the truth was actually the climax of the course of events that transpired. I'm sorry you feel otherwise. Besides, if you would kindly take down the image it would be appreciated because it is Nashua Telegraph property. Thank you kindly.

Russell A. James said...


Well put.

Russell A. James said...


Good point. Maybe in future I will say anti-Whites and then link "antis" to it.

Will that work?

Russell A. James said...


"Actually Russell, my response was I said I wanted to interview you and not you interview me. I never said anything about my official opinion on Korea."

I asked you if you were Korean, you responded that you were half-Korean. I then asked if you would be happy if Korea was being flooded by foreigners and you shook your head no and then said you really didn't want to talk about you. Maybe you'd like to clarify your "official" opinion on whether you think Korea and other non-White countries should be over-run by foreigners or if you think that diversity is only a "strength" for White countries.

"I was there to reflect what I saw. The image you said that misrepresented the truth was actually the climax of the course of events that transpired."

You took, by my estimation, at least a dozen photos. If you wanted to accurately reflect what you saw then why didn't you choose to run the photos that showed us shaking hands and talking amicably.

You weren't there to reflect what you saw. You were there to try to get a picture that your editors would find conducive to selling newspapers. So you/they published one that misrepresented the events, because it seemed to be dramatic and/or controversial, and you scumbags believe that selling newspaper advertising and making a profit is why you exist. You're too corrupt to remember that the news media's role in society is to honor their First Amendment obligations and report faithfully to the people about what their "elites" are doing their name. Because you're not doing that, grassroots organizations like ours have taken-up that mantle and you have turned to intentionally misrepresenting us, in order to prevent us from doing that.

Besides, if you would kindly take down the image it would be appreciated because it is Nashua Telegraph property. Thank you kindly.

Maybe you don't know how the web works, but I don't have an image "up" to take down. I simply have a small amount of HTML code in my blog that points to an image hosted on The Telegraph's server. If you want to take it down, feel free.

Furthermore, I'm not selling the image nor am I using it in a commercial manner. I believe my use of it is protected under the "Fair Use" provisions of copyright law.

Armed With Knowledge said...

very, very well-written piece.

Good job out there, telling our side of the story and now sharing this with the world. I'm adding you to my blogroll asap.

Russell A. James said...

Thanks Armed,

It's always good to see other good guys doing their part. I just checked-out your blog - great stuff. When I get around to setting-up a blog roll, you'll be on it.