Announcing the Charity “Help ICE Kick the Bucket Challenge” Benefiting Pro-Immigration Organizations

Redneck Muslim Imam Will Coley and his co-host Aria DiMezzo of daily libertarian talk show “The Call to Freedom” announce the new “Help ICE Kick the Bucket Challenge” to benefit pro-immigration organizations like the ACLU, CATO, the Libertarian Party, Detention Watch Network, Immigrant Defense Project, National Immigration Law Center, United We Dream, and the Refugee Right Coalition. Here’s a combo of two videos originally streamed earlier today in front of the LRN.FM studio in Keene:

Want more video of Will and Aria? Watch Call to Freedom every day from 4-7pm on LRN.FM’s Twitch Channel!

Now you can subscribe to Free Keene via email!

Don't miss a single post!


  1. ian should put on a shirt. Also if global warning is happening ice will go away

  2. Ian should put on a shirt. Also,if global wrming is happening Ice will go away because it will turn to water

  3. Pathetic. You stole the ALS ice bucket challenge. You can’t even come up with an original idea for your cause. By the way, illegal immigrants are a major problem for the US tax payer. Since the freekeeners do not hold jobs, I doubt you can understand the drain of tax payer money to house, and pay for all their amenities and the illegals expect that money.

    Come up with your own gimmick. stop stealing from the ALS bucket challenge.

  4. Jacks honey, don’t you think that busybodies like yourself deserve most of the blame here for this one? After all, if you and your dear friends on the left hadn’t been so staunch in the belief that taxpayers should be forced to rely on the government to provide key services, politicians would never have had the money necessary to try and buy immigrant votes in the first place.

  5. Libertarian here…. I thought about moving to Keene a lot in the past but you guys are ruining what I thought was a great movement. You’re slipping into sjw territory and are becoming irrelevant lately. What a shame.

  6. Mike, the libertarian population in New Hampshire is a mixture of both liberal and conservative leaning libertarians. This very small Free Keene group is more of the leftist type. You’ll find many right-winger types in the state who are against things such as open borders. My main problem with the conservative libertarians is they won’t do much of anything besides voting, maybe running for office, and having social gatherings. They won’t do other types of activism and consider it a waste of time. There is a lot of division in the New Hampshire freedom movement.

    The border issue is one of those things I have mixed feelings about. Yes, open immigration is destroying Europe. Yes, America has lost millions of jobs because of open borders. On the other hand, I’ve been detained, interrogated, and treated like a criminal when trying to cross borders. I’ve been banned from entering countries such as Canada and my passport was recently confiscated by Border Patrol upon returning to the United States from Mexico. Taking children away from parents trying to cross the border is not cool either.

  7. David…I am sure we could go back and forth forever on this stuff but to just look at the border issue as simply as “taking children away from parents” is extremely minimizing of what is going on. One in five of those kids are being used for either sex trafficking or as a means to get an adult over the border for some illegal activity such as drugs. I would think that to separate those kids to figure out what is going on would be a must. Also…These people are crossing our border illegally! You know what? If I break the law and go to jail, do you think I get to bring my kids with me or are will I be separated from my kids? What about the people in this country that have been separated from there kids for simply smoking a joint? I am much more interested in fixing Americas problems thus making our citizens free, safe and happy….not those who have chosen to come here through improper channels and endangering all of us while making us poorer by taxing us up to the teeth. Oh and guess who is making the most out of those taxes? The politician screaming the loudest for open borders. So, they pump out this narrative how we are ripping kids from their parents…meanwhile, that has been going on for decades. I don’t go to some other country illegally and then set myself up with all kinds of free goodies while contributing very little or nothing at all while all of my neighbors foot the bill. To those who will say “I thought Christianity was about loving your neighbor and you should help these people”. Well…I can easily flip that and say yea…I care about my neighbor so much that I would not want to burden them with my poor choices and financial decisions. All I am asking is that if you want to come here then do it legally so we know who you are and why you want to come here. As to your issues with crossing the border, I don’t know all of those details but if you were detained for your political beliefs as a US citizen then yea….that is something I am interested in and can get behind you on that. Just because Liberals are the ones that go to the streets does not mean that that is the mindset to follow. I would much rather have social gathering in which ideas flow through open debate. The ones in the streets with their signs have become incoherent children who have nothing to say and will shout down anything that challenges them. Keene needs to get their shit together, if there is a lot of division, and realize that America needs to come first….because that is the best way to help our neighbors.

  8. I agree that we need to focus on fixing America right now unlike the leftist libertarians who wish to fix the world. Opening the borders may cause more problems. Be careful listening to the fakestream media and television “programming” regarding the immigrant children. Take what they say with a grain of salt. They like to play with people’s emotions for whatever agenda they’re pushing.

    My travel issues are due to a combination of things including political beliefs, moral beliefs, religious beliefs, victimless crimes, and absolute refusal to pay money to the criminal government.

    Talk was over a long time ago. People need to get active. The patriots who fought in the American Revolution didn’t win their independence from Great Britain by attending social gatherings, voting, and running for office. Social gatherings accomplish nothing. You can’t vote the tyranny away. You can’t run for office and change it from the inside. The governments of America are too corrupt to fix, from the city level all the way up to the federal level. They’re criminal, terrorist, and highly Satanic organizations. They need to be completely abolished by any means necessary up to and including going to war with them. I’d prefer to try mass civil disobedience first but you can’t get people to do anything.

  9. Civil disobedience requires a willingness to ignore or absorb risk, David. Those aren’t elements likely to attract participants. And bear in mind that the only reason the left has any participation with such things at all is because they have a large reservoir of angry, unemployable failures with which to draw from.

  10. That is why the freedom movement in New Hampshire will never go anywhere. It will fail. I guarantee it. Those of us who want true freedom and are willing to take the necessary risks will have to seek it elsewhere.

  11. Go Mike go!

  12. CATO is a Koch front group. The Kochs are not immigrant friendly by a long shot. Just goes to prove FSP is a fake grass roots group

  13. The current mass immigration into the USA, Canada, and various countries in Europe has nothing to do with liberty. It is being pushed by globalists and Marxists as a plan to destroy what is left of freedom in these countries, and to bring down European based civilization. It is mass welfare statist migration and forced association of people with hostile ideologies, meant to demographically replace the populations who founded and built these countries.

    Libertarianism does not mean “open borders,” it means property rights. The world is presently arranged into governments whether anyone likes it or not, and every country in the world has some kind of laws concerning immigration and naturalization, and this would not change if we lived in a private property anarcho-capitalist society. A private property anarcho-capitalist society would not have open borders, it would have private property borders, and property owners would be free to set migration polices on their property, which means that property owners could exclude whoever they wanted, for whatever reason.

    We don’t live in private property anarcho-capitalist society. We live in a defacto democratic welfare state with forced association laws and lots or public property/infrastructure. The rightful owners of the public property/infrastructure in this country are the resident citizen taxpayers. While the state exists, there is nothing unreasonable, or anti-libertarian, in saying that the state should manage the public property/infrastructure in a way that does not invited foreign migrants who pose a threat to the native population, or does not invite in so many migrants that they displace the native population. Inviting in people who are Marxists or theocrats or who are criminal thugs or who are welfare seekers or who carry communicable diseases is the initiation of force against the existing domestic population, as in these are NOT peaceful people crossing borders. Saying that every person on the planet should have equal access to the public property/infrastructure/programs in this country is also advocating the initiation of force against the existing population.

    Statistically speaking, a super-majority of modern day immigrants and their offspring use government welfare programs and services at a rate that is higher than most of the existing population, and once becoming American citizens, a super-majority of these people vote in favor of increasing the welfare state and enacting more gun control laws.

    Given that the option of converting this country into a private property anarcho-capitalist society is not on the table right now, and does not appear to be on the table for the foreseeable future, the state policy in place should prohibit immigrants and their offspring from receiving government welfare and other government services (I’d consider making an exception for emergency healthcare, just so people don’t die, if it was followed by deportation, ie-“pnysical removal” from the country), and the citizenship process should be made more difficult. The current interpretation of Birthright citizenship needs to be ended. The amount of time it takes to receive citizenship should be increased, and people who sneak into the country should be denied any chance at citizenship (which means they will never be able to vote, and neither will any offspring they have, so if they sneak in, they will never have any political power). The citizenship test should be made more difficult. It should require a thorough understanding of the Declaration of Independence and US Constitution, and I’d also add a course of free market economics, and a special class on the right to keep and bear arms, along with trips to a firing range. Immigrants should sign contracts which bars from collecting welfare, or from working as a lobbyist for foreign country, and if they violate the contract, they should be deported. “Immigrants” (invader is a more appropriate term for these people) who are criminals or welfare leeches should be physically removed from the country. These people are initiating force and fraud, so there is nothing inappropriate about retaliating against them with force.

    Some libertarians act like if one calls for any kind of restrictions on immigration that they are calling for a big police state. This is completely false. The European countries of Switzerland, Leichtenstein, and Luxembourg are not being overrun by destructive migrants, and they all rank high on the freedom index. Why aren’t these countries being overrun by destructive foreign migrants? Because they don’t invite them, and they don’t entice them with welfare or an easy path to citizenship. Contrast this with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Belgium, Sweden, and some other countries in Europe which are being overrun by destructive foreign migrants, and all of these countries have bigger police states and bigger welfare states.

    Some libertarians also act as though if the government performs a function, that the function is automatically invalid, and this is absurd. I agree that in an ideal world, coercive government should not exist, but being that it does exist, what do we do in the interim? Government has a monopoly on fire righting. So if your house catches on fire, should you just let your house burn down. Government has a monopoly on roads, so should they not be maintained? Government has a monopoly on criminal justice, so should murderers, rapists, and thieves not be prosecuted? Since we don’t live in in a private property anarcho-capitalist society, property owners are prohibited from regulating migration/immigration.

    The only way that so called “open borders” would work would be if all land and infrastructure was privatized (in as fair a manner as possible, being divided up between the resident citizen taxpayers), anti-discrimination laws were repealed, government welfare was ended, and democracy was ended (voluntary organizations could still have democratic elections, but the results of them would only apply to people who voluntarily consented to the election), and the state were abolished. The real issue is not “open borders vs closed borders,” but rather who controls the land, the state or private property owners. No sane property owner is going to leave their property open to everyone on the planet to use how they see fit. No sane property owner is going to want to have destructive people on their property. So while the state exists, it should act as a good steward of the property in the country by not inviting destructive people into the country, and if they sneak in anyway, these people should not be rewarded with government handouts or citizenship.

    Disney World is like a defacto private city. If a person sneaks into Disney World, or if they buy a ticket but overstay their allotted ticket time, or if they violate Disney World’s rules while they are in Disney World. Disney World Security will “physically remove” them from the property. People who can’t afford a ticket to get into Disney World are not being oppressed. This is an example of how the world would operate if private anarcho-capitalist cities existed.

    There is no right to move onto land that is already occupied by other people. Land is a scarce resource, and competition for scarce resources leads to conflict. You won’t have a free society unless you are surrounded by people who actually want freedom. There are more than 7.5 billion people in the world, and most of them do not have a libertarian, or liberty leaning, ideology. Advocating that everyone in the world has a “right” to come here, not only destroys property norms, if it happened under our present context of living in a democratic welfare state with forced association laws and lots of public property, it would destroy any chance at freedom, or scaling back government, in this country. The fact that New World Order globalists and far left Marxists push for “open borders” and mass immigration should be a red flag to anyone who calls themselves a libertarian that this is not in the best interests of liberty.

  14. To the above…..BINGO!

  15. “One in five of those kids are being used for either sex trafficking or as a means to get an adult over the border for some illegal activity such as drugs.”

    These statistics are largely fabricated for the purpose of inducing an emotional reaction to get you supporting a particular agenda. 2/3 of people on the sex offender list have not even created a victim. It’s a list mostly of people who plead guilty to acts such as pissing in public or other consensual sexual activity that had no victims. Other examples are people close in age having illegal sexual relations like a 17 year old having sex with an 18 year old (in some states anyway) or those underage sexting (sending naked pictures of oneself to a significant other).

    The one in five statistic is of a similar nature. I don’t know the details, but its going to include stuff like “self-abuse” where you’d basically have to be a raging religious lunatic to think there is a serious problem here. Self-abuse is what some religious folks call anyone who masturbates. It is entirely misleading people into thinking that there are tons of victims when in fact there are not. If there are you are suggesting you are willing to go to some extreme to keep 13 year old boys from “self-abusing” because that is exactly the sort of thing they use to come up with these absurd, disturbing, and misleading statistics. Sex is get this: a normal healthy thing that near every young person goes through. There is even a name for it. It’s called puberty. Somewhere between 8 and 14 typically.

    “or as a means to get an adult over the border for some illegal activity such as drugs”

    Even if this was somehow morally repulsive which I’d argue its not this is a self-induced problem moralists created via government. Decriminalize drugs and open the boarder. The only thing that may be wrong but for which you can’t make a generalization like this is how it may be happening. If its involuntary that is. Young people should have all the same rights and freedoms as adults and its the lack of these rights and freedoms that opens young people up to abuse. Kids should be able to work, drive, drink, smoke, and take recreational drugs even. That doesn’t mean kids should do these things any more than adults should to the extent that they are harmful. At the end of the day everybody should be free to do what they like up to the point at which they are harming others [without said peoples consent and no you can’t vote consent one way or the other morally as the law does as that involves use of violence and deprivation of peoples rights and that is immoral]. I believe in rights and freedom for all regardless of age, sex, religious, race, where they were born, and similar ridicules groupings that people make for the purpose of discrimination.

    “If I break the law and go to jail, do you think I get to bring my kids with me or are will I be separated from my kids?”

    Just because its the law doesn’t make it moral. These people haven’t created a victim and the law is immoral. The solution is to change the law.

    “What about the people in this country that have been separated from there kids for simply smoking a joint? I am much more interested in fixing Americas problems thus making our citizens free, safe and happy….not those who have chosen to come here through improper channels and endangering all of us while making us poorer by taxing us up to the teeth.”

    This is republican brainwashing and not at all libertarian. First it’s wrong to deprive anybody of there freedom when there is no victim. So no that shouldn’t have happened, but it doesn’t justify ignoring others not like you who are having there rights and freedoms violated. Letting people come and go freely doesn’t make us more or less safe. This is just misleading and the vast majority of people who come here are not rapists or serial murders or hardened criminals. While those people will come too- it’s not disproportionate so you don’t end up with any increased risk- and that assumes you open the boarder to anyone including violent criminals.

    Immigrants contribute to the tax base and to whatever extent some are paid under the table (which might I add is common for people born in the US too particularly for the types of jobs low paid immigrants this implies tend to take) thats a government induced problem that would be resolved by making those immigrants legal because then taxes COULD be collected from them without fear of deportation. Unlike legal immigrants illegal immigrants who pay in can’t claim the benefits because they’re using other peoples social security numbers. The exact opposite thing occurs to what right wing republican nuts claim.

    ” Oh and guess who is making the most out of those taxes? The politician screaming the loudest for open borders. So, they pump out this narrative how we are ripping kids from their parents…”

    You are right in part- but its negligible given how similar democrats and republicans are. The justification for open boarders or not deporting isn’t kids. The democrats use emotional bull shit and mislead us just as do the republicans. The reason this should be eliminated is because these people have not created a victim in the laws in which they broke and the immoral act was the law that prevented them from crossing an arbitrary line. An immoral law is a law that should be violated and eliminated.

    “and then set myself up with all kinds of free goodies while contributing very little or nothing at all while all of my neighbors foot the bill. ”

    The reality is your wrong about whats happening, but the solution isn’t closed boarders. The solution is eliminating the nanny state. It’s really that simple. Stop redistributing wealth via violence and force and leave each to his own to profit. Those who claim to be so-called christians or otherwise of some other faith can do the charitable thing and contribute a percentage of profit to those less fortunate. No need for government nor violence to achieve the worthy aims of reducing or even eliminating poverty and suffering.

    “All I am asking is that if you want to come here then do it legally so we know who you are and why you want to come here”

    Really? This is disgusting. It’s no business of the cop where I came from or where I am going. It’s also no business of mine to demand a response to why someone has traveled here. If they are harming no one then let them be just as you let your neighbors who were born here be.

    “The ones in the streets with their signs have become incoherent children who have nothing to say and will shout down anything that challenges them”

    The people in the street in Keene are the same people doing shit at the state house. They are the same people promoting liberty and freedom for all. They aren’t the self entitled pricks who like you who only care about themselves and shit that might have an impact on oneself. The people of Keene have no issues with debating and many have debated in local politics on TV. Heck Free Talk Live is the largest libertarian radio show in the world and anybody can call in and debate anything they like and its run mostly by people from Keene or have lived in Keene and most are living in Keene still. The show is even based out of Keene. While some might not like a particular form of activism it’s that activism which has attracted 2/3 of movers to NH. To now be upset over it because it looks bad amongst the general population is just ridicules. I didn’t move to Keene to be popular. I moved to Keene because there are actual activists here doing something. I can’t say that about anywhere else outside of NH. I’m not saying Keene is the only place with activists in NH. There are lots of people across NH doing activism, but Keene is #1. Portsmouth is #2 and part of that is because of certain Keene activists who moved there. There are some in Manchester but most of em were originally from Keene. Keene is where you learn how to become an activist. It doesn’t matter which form of activism you like either. Because in Keene we do it all.

  16. “The patriots who fought in the American Revolution didn’t win their independence from Great Britain by attending social gatherings, voting, and running for office.”

    The time may come for war, but to go to war where that war will lead nowhere but slaughter is a war that could be better fought via other means. Quiting and leaving New Hampshire is just giving up. It doesn’t lead to revolution. It won’t lead to revolution. For revolution you need a lot more things to come together and its going to take time. It’s going to take more people promoting a movement, actually moving, and sticking it out through the years. Maybe it’ll be 10 years. Maybe it’ll be 50. Whatever it is doesn’t matter because it won’t happen until people some giving up. You gave up and left. Your attitude is exactly what the problem is and why there won’t be a violent revolution. Violent revolution requires patience. You lack that. But it doesn’t matter. We’re probably better off with a revolution brought by other means in the short term. 20,000 people won’t make a revolution. It’ll make a slaughter. 20,000 however can change politics within the state and it can create a nuisance for the feds.

  17. “FSP is a fake grass roots group”

    Who cares- the FSP isn’t why people are moving to New Hampshire. 2/3 of the people who have moved are the result of Keene activists. It has nothing to do with the FSP. That is directly what I was told by someone who did intake for movers. The people here are liberty minded even if there are a few who don’t understand what it actually means to be libertarian. There are people here trying to divide us- no doubt- probably half of you here in the comments are. Your not even libertarians so I probably shouldn’t give two shits about you. We’re better off with people not getting the wrong impression. We don’t need republicans or right wing religious nut jobs who want to control others. Hopefully anybody who happens upon this thread will realize that despite the efforts to divide the majority here are liberty-minded and want more freedom and will only ever get it as time progresses and more people move. The movement has already succeeded. It just hasn’t achieved total freedom or liberty yet. That takes time and those unwilling to be patient or act to achieve it will never see it.

  18. “Libertarianism does not mean ‘open borders’”

    The fundamental principle of which defines libertarian is ones objective to the use of violence to achieve social and political objectives for which there is no victim. WTF do you think you are doing when you advocate for boarders? Or at least guards on the boarder that get to dictate who can come and go? You are advocating for violence against peaceful people. No doubt that there are people who don’t agree with the ideas of freedom and liberty. We’ve all lived around such people all our lives. Actual libertarians make up less than 3% of the worlds population. The idea that somehow opening the boarder will result in an inundation of people who hate freedom and liberty is asinine. We already have 97% of the people who are free to move to NH living right here in the USA. You guys are making me feel like I’m amongst nothing but a bunch of lunatics. I know not everybody agrees on every little thing- but come on- I didn’t move to NH to be amongst more of the same people for whom I moved away from. Fortunately this isn’t the majority’s view here so I will just let it go. It’s largely just mostly the nut jobs posting here of which most are openly hostile to liberty and freedom.

  19. why are people writing walls of words?: I’m sure there isn’t any pay off from reading it all. It just means they are trying to baffle me with bullshit rather than being concise. It’s not interesting. 🙂

  20. You just had to get personal….I think I smell one of those snowflake, sjw nazi’s that nobody can talk with. oh well…

  21. I am advocating property rights. Borders would still exist in an anarcho-capitalist society, they would just be in the form of private property borders, and they would be defended by private security guards, private militias, private walls or fences, and armed property owners. My comnents about government borders above deals with how things ought to be handled in the interim, as in the reality that we do not live in a private property anarcho-capitalist society, nor are we close to establishing one. Foreign Marxists, theocrats, criminal thugs, welfare seekers, and people with communicable diseases are not peaceful people crossing borders, and therefore pose a threat to the existing population, so the interim government policy (as in while the state exists) should be to exclude these people, and if they sneak into the country anyway, to not reward them, or any offspring they have while here, with taxpayer funded benefits or citizenship. This is not the initiation of force. These people have no right to the land or resources of this country. It is nice for libertarians to talk about a long term goal of establishing an anarcho-capitalist society, which would have private property borders regulated by property owners, but we also have to operate in the real world as it is now, and the existence of states does not justify being overrun by foreigners who are Marxists, theocrats, criminal thugs, welfare seekers, or communicable disease carriers. Inviting people like this to live in the same land territory, and to share the same government, as you is not in the best interests of liberty.

Care to comment?