make their own decisions so the political correctness that stifles their free-speech, they don t like that. they don t like the government collecting all their phone records without a warrant. even my kids i text mm-hmm sometimes in the basement. we communicate not at the dinner table but you can see how they would not like their records because a lot of their life and friends and communication with their friends goes through their phone. they would not want the government looking at that. they are my best allies on campus, i was speaking at a college campus and platform is very small, 10 feet by 10 feet, this might be the free-speech seminar. where they can find you. step outside the zone, no freedom of speech outside the zone. first amendment, fourth amendment freedoms, kids are
waited for him. no, only peripherally. most of the time you get this training to instill confidence, but it s not like you ll get a black belt in judo or anything like this. what this did demonstrate is the character of the people who were involved. that is for sure. i want to ask you about the broader security implications. in fact, in the last hour, congressman adam schiff, he said we can t harden all of the soft targets. trains even the trains going from new york to washington, i always see members of congress on that train ride. what can we do. well, we can be vigilant. the intelligence services have to do a better job of perceiving who is a threat, who might be a threat and that butts right up against our concerns about first amendment and fourth amendment freedoms. it s a political question that must be resolved and the congress needs to get serious about resolving it. but blocking training off like
saying that we can have this record if it is relevant to any terrorism investigation. there s no need to show probable cause, there s no need to show reasonable suspicion. and the government s interpretation of relevance as the second u.s. circuit court of appeals said was unwarranted and unprecedented and did not justify the nsa s bulk telephone metadata collection program. so for a lot of slish terrence and those who care deeply about first and fourth amendment freedoms, section 215, there s a good argue that it should expire good argument that it should expire. the lone wolf provision is interesting. that does allow the government to track individuals who are not directly connected with isis al qaeda, or another known terrorist group. however, the government has admitted that they provision has not been used. so if the provision has not been used, it s hard to really quantify its efficacy in
in mass government surveillance is a threat to first and fourth amendment freedoms. how valid is the argument? the civil libertarians who say this erodes the bill of rights? i think certain provisions of the patriot act erode the bill of right. we have to remember the patriot act itself, i believe, was a 342-page law that amended at least 15 different federal laws. and many of the provisions of the patriot act made key technological update that s perhaps needed to be made. however, certain key provisions of the patriot act particularly with broad governmental interpretations, have eroded key provisions of the bill of rights. david hudson from the first amendment center, thanks for keening an eye on things for us. we appreciate the conversation. thanks. thank you. to overseas now, the end of today the travel ban expires for the five taliban leaders released from guantanamo bay. this in exchange for army sergeant bowe bergdahl. the so-called taliban five have been under governm