Depth Of Russian Politician's Cultivation Of NRA Ties Revealed

Danger spaces are 100x mo betta.

In a perfect world the wall would get 10' higher every time a Dim blabbers on about Russia.

a reply to: seeker1963

Oh, I'm plenty scared by what I am seeing, but you can't educate people who think they know it all already.

a reply to: villagesmithie


So is Mueller going to add the NRA as a prosecutable target, for colluding with Russians?

originally posted by: ketsuko
a reply to: seeker1963

Oh, I'm plenty scared by what I am seeing, but you can't educate people who think they know it all already.

Yea, the Post Modernists are doing their best to play the slight of hand to look over here, Russia, NRA, while protecting our so called educational system and psychiatric regime who are responsible along with the parents for destroying our youths minds.

I get rather amused watching the same people who promote infringing on the 2nd while losing their minds when video games are brought up? Here is an example and it isn't necessarily the video games BUT how spoiled damn rotten many of our children are. Let's not leave out the grown ups either who destroy their property when a video game upsets them either.

originally posted by: Ohanka
Even McCarthy wasn't as paranoid as the modern left.

McCarthy was a Republican right from 1944 and onwards? When the excessive soviet witch-hunts were going on.

Funny how some of these politicians switch political parties whenever convenient, they seem to be a bit more flexible in this than the average voter posting on ATS who feels comfortable in his trench of (indoctrinated) 'choice'.

I wonder what the statistics are for the people depicted in the screencapture below, trampling all over the 1st Amendment. I'm betting there are more conservative Republicans claiming to be Christians in that crowd than Democrats (Democrats are too busy playing the 'good guys' while they give an equal or near equal amount of support to the military industrial complex):

Pardon the racist title below, not my choice:

Where Is the World Heading?

...
Part of the answer is reflected in the comments of one of the prime ministers who attended the APEC conference. He said, “There is this thing called national pride.” Yes, human society is steeped in nationalism. Each nation and ethnic group is driven by the desire for self-determination. National sovereignty combined with the spirit of competition and greed has produced a volatile mix.
...
Nationalism is well described by the psalmist’s expression, “the pestilence causing adversities.” (Psalm 91:3) It has been like a plague on humanity, leading to untold suffering. Nationalism with its resultant hatred of other peoples has existed for centuries. Today, nationalism continues to fan the flames of divisiveness, and human rulers have not been able to stop it.

Many authorities recognize that nationalism and self-interest are the root of the world’s problems. For example, former United Nations Secretary-General U Thant observed: “So many of the problems that we face today are due to, or the result of, false attitudes . . . Among these is the concept of narrow nationalism​—‘my country, right or wrong.’” Still, nations today, engrossed in self-interest, are clamoring more and more for their own sovereignty. Those who have the advantage do not wish to give up even a little of it. For example, the International Herald Tribune made this observation about the European Union: “Rivalry and mistrust remain basic patterns of European politics. For most EU member states, it is still unacceptable for one of their peers to gain greater influence and take the lead.”

God’s Word, the Bible, correctly describes the result of all human rule, saying: “Man has dominated man to his injury.” (Ecclesiastes 8:9) By breaking the world up into their own separate dominions, groups of men as well as individuals have experienced the fulfillment of this Bible principle: “One isolating himself will seek his own selfish longing; against all practical wisdom he will break forth.”​—Proverbs 18:1.
...

Prejudice and Discrimination—Getting to the Roots: Awake!—2009

..
Getting to the Roots

Prejudice causes people to distort, misinterpret, or even ignore facts that conflict with their predetermined opinions. Prejudice may have its beginnings in seemingly innocent, but misguided, family values, or it may be sown by those who deliberately promote warped views of other races or cultures. Prejudice can also be fostered by nationalism and false religious teachings. And it can be a product of inordinate pride. As you reflect on the following points and on pertinent principles taken from the Bible, why not examine your own attitudes and see if changes are in order?

Associates. ..

Nationalism. One dictionary defines nationalism as “a sense of national consciousness exalting one nation above all others and placing primary emphasis on promotion of its culture and interests as opposed to those of other nations.” Ivo Duchacek, a professor of political science, observed in his book Conflict and Cooperation Among Nations: “Nationalism divides humanity into mutually intolerant units. As a result people think as Americans, Russians, Chinese, Egyptians, or Peruvians first, and as human beings second​—if at all.” A former UN secretary-general wrote: “So many of the problems that we face today are due to, or the result of, false attitudes​—some of them have been adopted almost unconsciously. Among these is the concept of narrow nationalism​—‘my country, right or wrong.’”

▪ What does the Bible say? “God loved the world [all mankind] so much that he gave his only-begotten Son, in order that everyone exercising faith in him might not be destroyed but have everlasting life.” (John 3:16) “God is not partial, but in every nation the man that fears him and works righteousness is acceptable to him.” (Acts 10:34, 35) Ask yourself, ‘If God’s love is impartial​—embracing people of all nations, including me—​should I not strive to imitate him, especially if I profess to reverence him?’

Racism. ..

Religion. ..

Pride. ..

The Manipulation of Information: Awake!—2000

..
Slogans and Symbols

Slogans are vague statements that are typically used to express positions or goals. Because of their vagueness, they are easy to agree with.

For example, in times of national crisis or conflict, demagogues may use such slogans as “My country, right or wrong,” “Fatherland, Religion, Family,” or “Freedom or Death.” But do most people carefully analyze the real issues involved in the crisis or conflict? Or do they just accept what they are told?

In writing about World War I, Winston Churchill observed: “Only a signal is needed to transform these multitudes of peaceful peasants and workmen into the mighty hosts which will tear each other to pieces.” He further observed that when told what to do, most people responded unthinkingly.

The propagandist also has a very wide range of symbols and signs with which to convey his message—a 21-gun salvo, a military salute, a flag. Love of parents can also be exploited. Thus, such symbolisms as the fatherland, the mother country, or the mother church are valuable tools in the hands of the shrewd persuader.

So the sly art of propaganda can paralyze thought, prevent clear thinking and discernment, and condition individuals to act en masse. How can you protect yourself?

[next page, linked in my signature]
..
They sift the facts, exploiting the useful ones and concealing the others. They also distort and twist facts, specializing in lies and half-truths. Your emotions, not your logical thinking abilities, are their target.

The propagandist makes sure that his message appears to be the right and moral one and that it gives you a sense of importance and belonging if you follow it. You are one of the smart ones, you are not alone, you are comfortable and secure—so they say.

How can you protect yourself from the types of people that the Bible calls “profitless talkers” and “deceivers of the mind”? (Titus 1:10) Once you are familiar with some of their tricks, you are in a better position to evaluate any message or information that comes your way. Here are some ways to do this.

Be selective: ..

Use discernment: ..

Put information to the test: ..

Ask questions: ..

Do not just follow the crowd:

a reply to: DBCowboy

Make NRA a hate group.

It is. For years it has been exploiting fear to sell guns to the American people. Fear of their own neighbors. Fear of strangers. Fear of their elected government. Does buying that gun make your fear go away? No? Nothing for it but to buy more guns. It doesn't matter how many guns you have, because now you are afraid "they" will try to take your guns away.

Make siding with the 2nd Amendment an ugly thing.

That is exactly what the NRA has done. Rather than encourage a debate about the role of citizen militias in the post-Napoleonic space, they are making it appear as though mass slaughter is an inalienable right.

The NRA's solution is not to ratchet down the firepower, it is to treat schoolchildren like dangerous prisoners. That means if someone wants to kill a lot of children, they would need to go to the park across the street. Well, that would have to be "hardened" too, right? Also movies theaters, shopping malls, etc, etc. Soon, you won't be able to go anywhere without armed guards scanning you for weapons. Who might be interested in taking America down that path?

originally posted by: DBCowboy
a reply to: villagesmithie

Yeah, uh, no.

Link NRA to Russians.

Make NRA a terrorist group.

Make NRA a hate group.


Make siding with the 2nd Amendment an ugly thing.

Make siding with the Bill of Rights an ugly thing.

Make siding with the Constitution an ugly thing.

No.

The 2nd amendment was written in the 1700s, when a gun had to be loaded and shot at about 3 bullets per min. Your president wants 21 to be the legal age to buy....are you going to beat him up over it? Russia messed with our election, and is showing videos of BOMBS HITTING FLORIDA, just because they got your man crush in office doesnt mean Russia is your friend....

In the 1800s there were no automatic weapons!

a reply to: kurthall

In the 1800s there were no automatic weapons!

Someone will be along in a minute to lecture you about the Gatling gun.

originally posted by: DJW001
a reply to: kurthall

In the 1800s there were no automatic weapons!

Someone will be along in a minute to lecture you about the Gatling gun.

So are you saying when lies are passed off as facts they should not be challenged...

Also got a link to support that the NRA is a hate group?

Last time I checked criminals could be from any race, and any religion... now if you want to argue that on occasion they use fear to whip their members into a voting frenzy you have the begining of an argument but otherwise you and Kurthall keep spouting nonsense.

Edit to add: and technically the Maxim was the first recoil operated machine gun in 1883.

a reply to: Irishhaf

So are you saying when lies are passed off as facts they should not be challenged...

Where do you get that from? Who are you accusing of lying? Why?

Also got a link to support that the NRA is a hate group?

Hatred grows out of fear, and fear is the NRA' s stock in trade.

Last time I checked criminals could be from any race, and any religion... now if you want to argue that on occasion they use fear to whip their members into a voting frenzy you have the begining of an argument but otherwise you and Kurthall keep spouting nonsense.

It has nothing to do with race... but come to think of it, how strongly do they defend blacks who are wrongly arrested for concealed carry? And yes, I have specifically said several times that the NRA uses fear to manipulate people. In doing so, they have perverted our society.

Edit to add: and technically the Maxim was the first recoil operated machine gun in 1883.

Gun owners are obsessive about technical details. They confuse simple ignorance with wilfully deceit. This is another way the NRA manipulates them. Calling a military style semiautomatic weapon a "machine gun" is considered a lie.

ETA: So you are okay with treating everyone as a potential mass murderer? Security checks at the entrance of every building?

Given the recent happenings, my confidence in the reputation of anyone trying to use Russia has political smear is nil. Its 2018 McCarthyism, The Revival.

LAMO (not lmao...actually lamo)

a reply to: DJW001

Saying the NRA uses fear is like saying a carpenter uses a hammer.

One time i got a robocall telling me that an army of liberals was waiting to march on gun rights and seize our ability to defend ourselves. Its why i let my membership lapse.

originally posted by: ketsuko
They're going to have to figure out how to disarm and incarcerate entire states while they're at it -- people who aren't going to just tamely accept the leftsplaining and go quietly.

Everytime the issue of guns comes up I have to have a little laugh at stuff like this. I'm always hearing from the American Central/Right "Oh noes, the big bad left want to take away our guns" and it's funny because I've yet to see a fellow Lefty call for guns to bammed carte blanche.

The Right seem to fear something that hasn't been threatened and fear it so much they have to come out the woodwork screaming everytime someone decides to take out their stress on their peers in a mass shooting. I don't understand where they get this from.
Forgetting the fact that it's written in the constitution, there are so many guns in civilian hands in the US (I'd be surprised if the number was far higher than official figures state, after all, not every US firearm is registered) and gun culture is so deeply ingrained in American Cluture that it would be logistically and probably even rhetorically impossible to carry out. The US government could not snatch all your guns, even if they wanted to, so why all the fear? You [gun nuts] have achieved the very thing you crave, an armed populace that has the ability to stand up to the Government, you've won, even if AR15's were banned for sale from Midnight tonight, it would make no difference, you'd still be winning.

As you guys are so fond of parroting, it's your constitutional right, sure the constitution can be changed but given that only 17 ammendments have been ratified, other than the Bill of Rights, in the past 229 years, let this Scotsmen assure you, the majority of your guns are safe.

I do find myself face-palming at the paranoia displayed by those who passionately uphold the 2nd ammendment and even more so at how they stubbornly refuse to see anyone else's perspective on the issue, it's a dangerous mindset at times. There is the odd surprise among those who support the 2nd, like the ex military chap who supports the right to bear arms but believes assault rifles should be banned for civilian purchase, it seems only sensible to me. If only more gun enthusiasts could see this logically...

a reply to: ketsuko

Here is the truly disturbing part that you seem to be missing in this. It has been shown that Russia's true game is TO WEAKEN THIS COUNTRY.

Star for this. This is the key point, one I don't see often enough. I don't "HATE" Russia. I do recognize them as a foreign power. I do recognize that their goals and The US are not always going to be the same.

In the debates on the issue of Russia trying to influence elections it quickly turns to a left/right argument. The right was all about the sanctity of our election process in the picture ID debate but, seem uncaring about this issue because it arose from questions about their team.

Oh and having the NRA potentially involved makes the right even more resistant. What better group would you use to access the right? If you wanted to influence the left you would use maybe Planned Parenthood or something. If you want to make this some left conspiracy to attack guns, believe what you need but don't ignore it because it threatens one of your sacred cows. and, Yes I know the left does it too.

We have (always) the next elections coming. If allowed to, Russia will work for their goals in that process. Again, Russia is not the big boogie man but they will work for their goals, not ours. It is our responsibility to try to make our system work for the citizen of this country, and to protect it as best we can. Sometimes that takes guns. Sometimes that take diplomacy. Sometimes that takes computers.

This real threat is laughed at and poo-pooed as inconsequential because of politics. You don't sustain a strong country that way.

originally posted by: djz3ro

originally posted by: ketsuko
They're going to have to figure out how to disarm and incarcerate entire states while they're at it -- people who aren't going to just tamely accept the leftsplaining and go quietly.

Everything's the issue of guns comes up I have to have a little laugh at stuff like this. I'm always hearing from the American Central/Right "Oh noes, the big bad left want to take away our guns" and it's funny because I've yet to see a fellow Lefty call for guns to bammed carte blanche.

FIrst, you use mocking hyperbole rather than truthful statements to describe what your opposition is saying. Then you flat out lie when you say you have yet to see a fellow lefty call for banning? I can link to thousands upon thousands of individuals calling for it, or maybe a dozen people who would be seen as "well known".

How do you intend to be taken seriously when you won't even talk honestly? Do you want to be taken seriously? Or just ruffle feathers? Because that is how you simply ruffle feathers. Childish mocking is the lowest form of that particular "art".

The Right seem to fear something that hasn't been threatened and fear it so much they have to come out the woodwork screaming everytime someone decides to take out their stress on their peers in a mass shooting. I don't understand where they get this from.

"The right" fears the same thing you fear: what the media tells them to fear.

But in this instance, its that the media trotted out a group of traumatized kids to "lead a national dialogue" on guns. This debacle is what results when you exploit children for political purposes. Traumatized children no less.

Forgetting the fact that it's written in the constitution, there are so many guns in civilian hands in the US (I'd be surprised if the number was far higher than official figures state, after all, not every US firearm is registered) and gun culture is so deeply ingrained in American Cluture that it would be logistically and probably even rhetorically impossible to carry out. The US government could not snatch all your guns, even if they wanted to, so why all the fear? You [gun nuts] have achieved the very thing you crave, an armed populace that has the ability to stand up to the Government, you've won, even if AR15's were banned for sale from Midnight tonight, it would make no difference, you'd still be winning.

As you guys are so fond of parroting, it's your constitutional right, sure the constitution can be changed but given that only 17 ammendments have been ratified, other than the Bill of Rights, in the past 229 years, let this Scotsmen assure you, the majority of your guns are safe.

I do find myself face-palming at the paranoia displayed by those who passionately uphold the 2nd ammendment and even more so at how they stubbornly refuse to see anyone else's perspective on the issue, it's a dangerous mindset at times. There is the odd surprise among those who support the 2nd, like the ex military chap who supports the right to bear arms but believes assault rifles should be banned for civilian purchase, it seems only sensible to me. If only more gun enthusiasts could see this logically...

Calling people "nuts" then claiming that they aren't logical, is pure ad hom.

Few things are funnier and more ironic than someone who employs logical fallacies in debate trying to end their statement with "if only you could see this logically".

LOL, i would say the same in return. Except I have evidence of your lack of logic in your argument: You have to use ad homs to make your point.

a reply to: DJW001

Kurthall said there were no automatic weapons in the 1800's that is a lie, there were.

Calling a military style semiautomatic weapon a "machine gun" is considered a lie.

that statement is a lie, the facing is the only thing that resembles a military issue rifle, the internal workings are missing some bloody important pieces that separates them from the military issued rifle. They are more akin to a mini-14 which folks seem to have little problem with.

If you want to be taken seriously learn what you are talking about, do not pull some BS like CNN has been doing throwing out words during a demonstration of an AR 15 like "going full semi-automatic now" which only sounds good to people that are ignorant of guns.

Approach gun owners with knowledge and a an actual plan and most will engage in a meaningful dialogue, come at us with lies, ignorance and only emotion we are going to laugh at you and mock you. Cause some of us believe Congress should not be trusted with picking and choosing which parts of the bill of rights applies.

Personally I would have rather stood on the mtn defending the 4th but its hard to galvanize people to action where its hard to show the violations, guns not so much.

So to sum up, if you want to actually have a dialogue, learn the subject then come to us with a realistic plan (not feel good legislation) and you will get a dialogue.




This is the idiotic video from CNN that does not help promote dialogue.

a reply to: villagesmithie

Those sneaky Russkys, it makes sense they would align themselves with such a popular and divisive organisation, if the Gun-cobtrol Movement was as organised as the NRA, I daresay they'd have an inside mm there too. There doesn't seem to be a lot of common ground when it comes to America's love affair with firearms, it's a bit of a Marmite issue, you love it or hate it. It's the perfect position to try and create a wedge in the Great American Populace.

Then again, is there any real proof or, like previous "Russian Meddling" is this just heresy? I doubt we'll ever know the truth...

a reply to: djz3ro
There has been plenty of evidence it's a question of what constitutes proof in your mind.

How much "proof" do you need to address a potential problem?

Does it only become a problem if it effects your "team"?

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan


FIrst, you use mocking hyperbole rather than truthful statements to describe what your opposition is saying. Then you flat out lie when you say you have yet to see a fellow lefty call for banning? I can link to thousands upon thousands of individuals calling for it, or maybe a dozen people who would be seen as "well known".

How do you intend to be taken seriously when you won't even talk honestly? Do you want to be taken seriously? Or just ruffle feathers? Because that is how you simply ruffle feathers. Childish mocking is the lowest form of that particular "art".

OK well, I call it like I see it and that's how it comes across when people are jumping up claiming that their right to bear arms is at risk. You make a fairly bold claim and in fact call me out as a liar when, in actual fact, I've never seen anyone call for an outright ban. You're claiming to know what I have and have not read and questioning my honesty based on an assumption you made. Strike 1

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

"The right" fears the same thing you fear: what the media tells them to fear.

But in this instance, its that the media trotted out a group of traumatized kids to "lead a national dialogue" on guns. This debacle is what results when you exploit children for political purposes. Traumatized children no less.

And on to another assumption, you assume I'm scared of what the Media tells me to be scared of? Please, I'm scared of very little. There is no point worrying about anything that is out of my control. I'm not saying I'm some big brave fella, I just have no place in my life for irrational fears and fearing what the MSM tells us to fear is incredibly irrational. Strike 2.
Also, it wasn't the MSM trotting out a bunch of traumatised kids, it was a bunch of traumatised kids speaking out because they thought enough was enough.

originally posted by: bigfatfurrytexan

Calling people "nuts" then claiming that they aren't logical, is pure ad hom.

Few things are funnier and more ironic than someone who employs logical fallacies in debate trying to end their statement with "if only you could see this logically".

LOL, i would say the same in return. Except I have evidence of your lack of logic in your argument: You have to use ad homs to make your point.

Again, calling it as I see it. I don't think all firearms enthusiasts are gun nuts, I have family and friends in America who are safe gun owners, not one of them feels the need to buy even a Semi-automatic, nevermind a full on Assault Rifle. Overkill is a word I hear among my gun owning friends when describing these weapons of war. A gun nut would be, in my humble opinion, someone who blankly refuses to see the other side of the argument (I always try and see things from the perspective of others, I've actually learned a lot taling part in these threads and my stance on guns has softened a bit in looking at things from a gun enthusiasts perspective, doesn't mean I'd want Scotland to have US Style gun laws). So for this point I apologise for coming across like I was calling you, or anyone in this thread, or even this site, a gun nut, I mean a particular[ly obsessive] branch of the whole spectrum of gun owners, (you know, the kind that get their AR15 blessed by a priest or those that get their kids prom photos taken while they're armed to the teeth with assault rifles and side arms.

I am a logical thinker (not always critical but getting there) and I can't help that. When I enter these threads (it is something I find quite fascinating, especially with all the US politics being discussed these days) I do so to try and better understand what it is behind America's love of the gun

Peace...
(don't shoot me)