If FSFLA can't point to any contributions to open-source replacements for the pieces they are removing from the kernel, I believe this is pure sensationalist FUD.
How is kernel-libre any better, for users who already have hardware that requires non-free drivers or firmware? It isn't. Whereas there are drivers distributed with the kernel that *are* free implementations of drivers where previously only proprietary drivers were available.
Does FSFLA provide toolchains for common hardware platforms? Example source code? For how many devices have they written free firmwares? Do you even compile the ath9k firmware from source, or are you distributing pre-built binaries, or none?
In removing non-free firmware, FSFLA themselves are actually distributing an open-core distribution, because there are other members of the "community" who provide the "premium" non-free firmware. So, I think they should either stop using the term, or provide free replacements.
Do I support hardware with Free firmware? Yes, I bought an ath9k card over other cards due to open driver+open firmware. Will I assist users, friends, family in running a mostly-free-software environment with proprietary firmware or drivers? Yes, because a greater demand for free software support is *also* important to device manufacturers.
What is going to be more effective at getting better open-source support:
-a tiny minority (0.01% of entire market) insisting on 100% free (BIOS, firmware etc.)
-a much larger minority (>1% of entire market) asking for free drivers, and a community who have made it *easier* for vendors to ship free firmware than propietary firmware.
I see you wanting to make it difficult to ship proprietary firmware, what are you doing to make it easier to ship free firmware?