NRA, GOA to Join You on Your NSA Witch Hunt

StopWatching3

We already caught a glimpse of this during the “StopWatching.Us” rally, but now pro-gun groups are lining up alongside gullible liberals to attack the NSA and the Obama administration.

via The Hill

The National Rifle Association (NRA) is among a number of groups that have signed on to an American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) lawsuit against the secretive government agency. [...]

Another Second Amendment advocate, the Gun Owners of America, expects to back NSA legislation as well. [...]

The NRA is one of the most active lobbying forces on Capitol Hill, but a spokesman said the group is not yet meeting with lawmakers about intelligence reform, focusing instead on the lawsuit.

Gun Owners of America, in contrast, plans to mobilize a full-scale advocacy campaign involving “hundreds of thousands” of advocates once NSA legislation gets moving, according to Pratt.

This would be a good time to remind you that the director of Gun Owners of America, Larry Pratt, believes in the coming U.N. takeover and that immigrants will some day take away your guns. He also warned that President Obama would deliberately withhold Social Security checks in the event of a government shutdown. Obviously that didn’t happen.

Pratt also believes in FEMA concentration camps, that we need to impeach the president before he assumes total dictatorial control, and that we should all be preparing to fight in the race war.

The NRA and Gun Owners of America both believe that the NSA is using its powers to create national gun registry, among other things.

In Hindsight, that’s just as plausible as the idea that the NSA is watching every single thing you say and do, scrutinizing your sexts and reading your emails to Mom and Dad.

As for working with the NRA, the ACLU’s head lobbyist Laura Murphy justified this in a manner similar to the way some liberals do when they find themselves on the same side as Ron or Rand Paul.

“If we’re working with an organization and we can agree on one narrow principled objective, even if we disagree 90 percent of the time, we’ll find a way to work together. … [W]hen it comes to developing strategic alliances, both of our organizations are very sophisticated,” Murphy said.

Someone who agrees with you on “one narrow principle” for dubious or malicious reasons is not your friend or ally. This is utterly naive, opportunistic, and asinine.

Do you stand with Klan?

This entry was posted in Guns, NSA, Security and tagged , , , . Bookmark the permalink.
  • feloniousgrammar

    This is one of the reasons I’m no longer a card-carrying member of the ACLU. What the hell do they know about the NSA and our security needs? Where were they during the Bush Administration? Did they notice the changes in NSA policy after Obama was elected?

    Why would they stand with crazy people? Do they not have a more specific case than PRIVACY? Do they not understand the need for secrecy and privacy?

    • nathkatun7

      Like you, I no loungers subscribe to ACLU!

    • drspittle

      This is why I am so suspicious about these “revelations”. The NSA was created in 1952. Now, all of a sudden, after the Patriot Act, “watch what you say”, and the rest of the post 9/11 fear mongering enabled and facilitated by our beloved mainslime media, what the NSA does is “suddenly a problem”. Really?

  • dubstub

    Like it or not, right or wrong, public opinion on the value of Snowden’s leaks and the need for meaningful NSA reform is clear. Democrats can take this opportunity to be on side that’s winning and own the repeal bad Bush-era policies, or they can dig in their heels and face the political consequences.

    The implication that people who push for reform are standing with the Klan is the kind of rhetoric that will play well with the readers of this blog, but it is out of touch with the political realities of the time.

    • feloniousgrammar

      Democrats are working on it. The fact that most media outlets would rather report on sensational scandal mongering than the facts, does not change that.

      http://www.wyden.senate.gov/priorities/surveillance-reform

    • Pink No More

      RAARGH RAARGH YOU’LL BE SORRY RAARGH RAARGH

      The rube never wants to admit he’s been conned, does he?

    • formerlywhatithink

      This has gone soooooo far beyond the NSA. Now Snowden is “leaking” that member countries of the EU are sharing intelligence. The horror, allies cooperating.

      Tell me this, has any country that is currently whining about NSA surveillance come straight out and said that they do not conduct intelligence activities against the US? Of course not. The US Is the biggest, ripest target in the intelligence world and to think that these whining countries are not spying in/on the US government, economy and it’s leaders is moronic.

      Here’s another question. With the treasure trove of documents that Snowden has, which apparently includes surveillance activity of many, many countries, why no “revelations” about Russia’s intelligence operations? Or Brazil’s intelligence operations? Are we seriously supposed to believe that there is no information about the countries that are shielding Snowden and Greenwald?

      The implication that people who push for reform are standing with the Klan is the kind of rhetoric that will play well with the readers of this blog, but it is out of touch with the political realities of the time.

      Do you seriously believe this tripe? I’m against homophobia, but, no, I won’t stand shoulder to shoulder with a homosexual who is a blatant racist and espouses violence against non whites. I’m against racism but no, I won’t stand shoulder to shoulder with a black man who is blatantly homophobic and espouses violence against them. And yes, I’m opposed to some of the overreach of the NSA and believe that we need much stricter oversight over, not just the NSA, but our entire intelligence apparatus. But it will be a cold day in hell before I will ever stand shoulder to shoulder with the likes of the KKK, NRA, GOA or any other organization with whom I “disagree 90 percent of the time.” And if you’re willing to do so, you seem to have no problem with ditching 90 percent of your principles and beliefs to support a mere 10 percent, which makes you nothing but a political opportunist.

    • Jan Civil

      ‘implication’? They find themselves colliding through the vacuousness of the rhetoric they support, the uncritical nature of their reaction.

  • formerlywhatithink


    “If we’re working with an organization and we can agree on one narrow principled objective, even if we disagree 90 percent of the time, we’ll find a way to work together. … [W]hen it comes to developing strategic alliances, both of our organizations are very sophisticated,” Murphy said.

    Fucking typical of the far right.

    “Oh, you’re a bunch of flagrant racists who make money on the blood of children and innocents and are calling for armed revolution against the government of the United States and want to kill all the immigrants in the country? You lousy, fucking, pieces of…..huh?….what?…you don’t like the NSA? Hey, I don’t like the NSA. Come brother, let’s go preach together.”

    Principles, good if it’s convenient, disposable if it isn’t.

  • blair houghton

    the ACLU never struck me as very smart.

  • js hooper

    There is a significant percentage of the dude bro faux left that is more willing to align with teabaggers and other right wing freaks than they are with mainstream democratic labor groups, minorities,environmental groups etc. Somehow they have managed to convince the professional left that THEY are the real left.