It’s archived at https://web.archive.org/web/20141116122053/http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/14/chris-cox-laura-murphy-bipartisanship-in-defense-o/print/ <https://web.archive.org/web/20141116122053/http:/www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/14/chris-cox-laura-murphy-bipartisanship-in-defense-o/print/>
http://www.nationaljournal.com/tech/the-nra-and-aclu-came-together-to-endorse-nsa-reform-in-an-op-ed-then-the-piece-disappeared-20141118 The NRA and ACLU Came Together to Endorse NSA Reform in an Op-Ed. Then the Piece Disappeared. Edward Snowden's public disclosures of NSA domestic spying programs last year prompted calls for reform.(SXSW) November 18, 2014 For a few hours, it was big news. And then it vanished. On Monday morning, the American Civil Liberties Union and National Rifle Association published a joint op-ed in the *Washington Times *urging the Senate to pass legislation that would limit the government's domestic spying powers. It was a meaningful push from two powerful groups that—as the groups themselves noted—rarely agree on anything. And the support came just a day before the Senate is scheduled to take a key (and hotly contested) vote Tuesday on the measure, whose supporters titled it the "USA Freedom Act." Hours after the op-ed went up on the *Times* site, however, it disappeared. The link <http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2014/nov/14/chris-cox-laura-murphy-bipartisanship-in-defense/> to where the op-ed once appeared now tells readers, "This story is no longer available on the site." And why exactly the op-ed disappeared remains a matter of mystery and contention. David Keene, the opinion editor at the *Times*, said the op-ed was put up "prematurely" and subsequently taken down as a "courtesy" to the authors, who requested the action. But Laura Murphy, director of the ACLU's Washington legislative office, who coauthored the piece, said that Keene's story was false. "That is inaccurate," Murphy said. "The version that was online was approved by the NRA, and I was not at all unhappy with the final product." She added: "It was definitely taken down, and I am very disappointed. In terms of a rationale, you'd have to ask the *Washington Times*. … To say that it was not ready and that they did it as a courtesy to the party—they didn't do it as a courtesy to the ACLU." Keene did not respond to multiple calls seeking additional comment regarding the ACLU's version of why the piece was retracted. Given that the *Times *says the groups asked to retract the piece, and given that the ACLU says it did not push for the retraction, the remaining possibility (assuming the other parties are being candid) is that the NRA pushed for the retraction. But the advocacy group has not responded to requests for comment on what happened to the op-ed. Both the NRA and ACLU have championed reforms to the National Security Agency's spy programs since Edward Snowden's disclosures exposed them publicly last year. Both organizations have also been <http://www.nraila.org/legislation/federal-legislation/2014/9/usa-freedom-act-would-curtail-government-surveillance-programs.aspx> vocal <https://www.aclu.org/blog/national-security/senate-jumps-race-rein-nsa-surveillance> about supporting the USA Freedom Act. The USA Freedom Act would effectively end the National Security Agency's bulk collection of Americans' phone metadata, which tracks the numbers and time stamps of phone calls but not their actual content. Here are key excerpts from the op-ed, as published Monday, titled "Bipartisanship in defense of the Constitution": *As representatives of two organizations, the National Rifle Association (NRA) and the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), with very different perspectives on some issues, we are joining together today because of our belief in the constitutional guarantees of free speech and privacy and our concern that both could be lost unless we rein in governmental surveillance and monitoring that characterizes life in this country.* Additionally, the groups wrote: *In our view, current surveillance practices violate the First and Fourth Amendments and threaten other rights, such as those guaranteed by the Second Amendment, and they are not making us any safer.* And: *While there is much the Senate shouldn't or needn't do during the "lame-duck" session, the USA Freedom Act is badly needed legislation that has bipartisan support and will protect the rights of all Americans. The NRA and the ACLU, along with many members of Congress from both parties, support these reforms and they should be enacted, without weakening amendments, by the Senate and sent to the White House as soon as possible.* __._,_.___ ------------------------------ Posted by: "beowulf" <[email protected]> ------------------------------ Visit Your Group <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/grendelreport/info;_ylc=X3oDMTJmajZrN3NiBF9TAzk3MzU5NzE0BGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDdnRsBHNsawN2Z2hwBHN0aW1lAzE0MTY0OTY2NTE-> [image: Yahoo! Groups] <https://groups.yahoo.com/neo;_ylc=X3oDMTJlb2xrMjZhBF9TAzk3NDc2NTkwBGdycElkAzIwMTk0ODA2BGdycHNwSWQDMTcwNTMyMzY2NwRzZWMDZnRyBHNsawNnZnAEc3RpbWUDMTQxNjQ5NjY1MQ--> • Privacy <https://info.yahoo.com/privacy/us/yahoo/groups/details.html> • Unsubscribe <[email protected]?subject=Unsubscribe> • Terms of Use <https://info.yahoo.com/legal/us/yahoo/utos/terms/> __,_._,___ -- -- Thanks for being part of "PoliticalForum" at Google Groups. For options & help see http://groups.google.com/group/PoliticalForum * Visit our other community at http://www.PoliticalForum.com/ * It's active and moderated. Register and vote in our polls. * Read the latest breaking news, and more. --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "PoliticalForum" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
