Florida teacher tells fourth-graders to give up constitutional rights

[ScipioCowboy]

I agree Scipio. This one's a classic.....Friedman just blows Donahue's left wing philosophy out of the water.

[video=youtube;RWsx1X8PV_A]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RWsx1X8PV_A[/video]

Great clip. I've watched it many times.

"Who rewards virtue? You think the Communist Commissar rewards virtue?"

 

[Dodger12]

regarding the patriot Act...yes it was passed during the Bush era. It was set to expire in 2010 but was renewed by congress and President Obama.

and yes it is a piece of crap that tramples the Constitution in my opinion.

And I'd bet you know very little about it and can't bring up an example where it's affected your quality of life or how it's changed the way you do business.

 

[Dodger12]

Great clip. I've watched it many times.

"Who rewards virtue? You think the Communist Commissar rewards virtue?"

"Do you think the President rewards virtue, or does he pick (his cabinet) based on political affiliation?"

People are naive.......

 

[bkeavs]

"Do you think the President rewards virtue, or does he pick (his cabinet) based on political affiliation?"

People are naive.......

Chuck Hagel-Republican

 

[Dodger12]

Chuck Hagel-Republican

Yes, because Hagel opposes Obama's views which is why he was nominated. Not. Please, go down the list and see that he agrees with the administration on most key issues (Iran, Israel, North Korea, Cuba, defense spending, etc.). He's a Democrat in Rublican's clothing.

 

[bkeavs]

Yes, because Hagel opposes Obama's views which is why he was nominated. Not. Please, go down the list and see that he agrees with the administration on most key issues (Iran, Israel, North Korea, Cuba, defense spending, etc.). He's a Democrat in Rublican's clothing.

So now we have to decipher if someone who is a registered republican,has some views that agree with the democrats.

That's a bad thing, or maybe an open minded person who doesn't base decisions along party lines, but what he personally feels best is for his country regardless of which party he is aligned with

 

[Dodger12]

That's a bad thing, or maybe an open minded person who doesn't base decisions along party lines, but what he personally feels best is for his country regardless of which party he is aligned with

I don't believe we should be anti-sanctions and soft on Iran, nor believe that we should be anti-Israel in the Middle East, among other things. We can keep those policies of appeasement and it will do nothing to change the way our enemies feel about us (see Boston, bombing). And if you believe in drone strikes on US soil, have at it. Hagel is your guy.

 

[JBond]

And I'd bet you know very little about it and can't bring up an example where it's affected your quality of life or how it's changed the way you do business.

and you would be wrong. I am extremely familiar with the legislation and subsequent rulings allowing all sorts of interesting things. I know you are familiar with the Fourth Amendment. Does probable cause or warrants ring any bells? The initial claims, that it would only be used to listen in on known terrorists contacting people in the US turned out to be completely false.

Quick question...Do you think civil servants should have access to all you personal and professional communications even though there is no probable cause to do so? If so, why? Are you familiar with the new data center in Utah?

 

[JBond]

Chuck Hagel-Republican

No...not really. He can place whatever letter he wants next to his name, but he shares little in common with the rank and file members of the Republican party.

 

[bkeavs]

No...not really. He can place whatever letter he wants next to his name, but he shares little in common with the rank and file members of the Republican party.

sigh

 

[JBond]

sigh

Ohhhhhhhhh Myyyyyyyyyy

You disagree? Why do you think the Pres picked him? Because they disagree on all major foreign policies?

 

[superpunk]

Yes, because Hagel opposes Obama's views which is why he was nominated. Not. Please, go down the list and see that he agrees with the administration on most key issues (Iran, Israel, North Korea, Cuba, defense spending, etc.). He's a Democrat in Rublican's clothing.

Maybe he's just a reasonable person who identifies with the Republican party on certain major issues (I don't know his policies so fiscally perhaps?) and we'd be better off with alot more of him.

 

[Dodger12]

and you would be wrong. I am extremely familiar with the legislation and subsequent rulings allowing all sorts of interesting things. I know you are familiar with the Fourth Amendment. Does probable cause or warrants ring any bells? The initial claims, that it would only be used to listen in on known terrorists contacting people in the US turned out to be completely false.

Quick question...Do you think civil servants should have access to all you personal and professional communications even though there is no probable cause to do so? If so, why? Are you familiar with the new data center in Utah?

Which goes back to my original question. How has it affected you or your quality of life? Can you point me to the law where it violates the 4th amendment. Just curious. I thought there were special courts/judges set up to review the affidavits.

 

[Dodger12]

Maybe he's just a reasonable person who identifies with the Republican party on certain major issues (I don't know his policies so fiscally perhaps?) and we'd be better off with alot more of him.

He's more in line with the current administration on matters of foreign policy. I don't think this was some peace offering to the Republicans by Obama, do you?

 

[JBond]

Which goes back to my original question. How has it affected you or your quality of life? Can you point me to the law where it violates the 4th amendment. Just curious. I thought there were special courts/judges set up to review the affidavits.

The statute authorizing the use of “national security letters” as amended by the Patriot Act 505(a) contains no judicial oversight. The statute allows the government to compel the production of financial records, credit reports, and telephone, Internet, and other communications or transactional records. The letters can be issued simply on the FBI’s own assertion that they are needed for an investigation, and also contain an automatic and permanent nondisclosure requirement. In the most controversial portions of the Patriot Act that require judicial oversight, the judge wields a rubber-stamp. For example, Section 215 requires the FBI to apply to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain an order for the production of business records. The FBI must only specify that the records pertain to a foreign intelligence investigation, a vague and broad concept. The judge is required to issue the order after the FBI makes this specification, making the judicial review a mere formality than actual oversight.

I also have concerns regarding the new Data center. The feds do not need all my personal and professional correspondence. Especially when I have not been charged with a crime. The fourth amendment still exist...at least in theory I guess.

Just because I have not been personally effected at this point does not mean I should be unconcerned. No, they have not come for me... yet. Remember history.

 

[junk]

[video=youtube;2ucv1-PJVT4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2ucv1-PJVT4[/video]

 

[Dodger12]

The statute authorizing the use of “national security letters” as amended by the Patriot Act 505(a) contains no judicial oversight. The statute allows the government to compel the production of financial records, credit reports, and telephone, Internet, and other communications or transactional records. The letters can be issued simply on the FBI’s own assertion that they are needed for an investigation, and also contain an automatic and permanent nondisclosure requirement.

Thanks for the level-headed response JB. The NSL letters sound more like subpoenas for information that has no expectation of privacy since we've given to the information to third person providers (ie: internet service providers, phone companies, etc.). Google collects and tracks our net surfing information whether we like it or not. Our e-mails addresses and other personal information such as address and phone number are sold by major retailers after a purchase to companies who then spam us to death. I guess what I'm saying is that this information is just not that "protected". The NSL letters have come under scrutiny and they now require congressional reporting on a yearly basis so at least the government is trying to address areas of the Patriot Act where abuse could take place.

It's not a perfect system. But the rapidly changing technology required a change in the law, especially the wire tap laws. These internet and phone companies are the greatest threat to you and me. They sell "secure" methods of communication as part of their business model. Legally, they have to provide a means to intercept this communication for legitimate, court authorized, law enforcement purposes but this isn't always the case and the companies drag their feet to find a "solution", thus hindering law enforcement. I'm sure you can see the inherent issues and dangers this can cause in a terrorism investigation.

For example, Section 215 requires the FBI to apply to a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Court to obtain an order for the production of business records. The FBI must only specify that the records pertain to a foreign intelligence investigation, a vague and broad concept. The judge is required to issue the order after the FBI makes this specification, making the judicial review a mere formality than actual oversight.

Section 215 only expanded an already existing law by expanding the scope of records which could be requested. Previously, four types of documents initially could be sought in foreign intelligence or international terrorism investigations, including records from common carriers, hotels, storage facilities, and vehicle rental companies. Does it matter to me that 215 now allows law enforcement to gather records from libraries? Heck, the law's been dubbed the "Library Provision" and the biggest challenge to 215 has come from library advocates. I just don't see where it's that much of a threat and I just don't see where a library should be a place where one could be shielded from law enforcement authorities. If I recall, the 9/11 hijackers were using the library computers to communicate; these folks knew our laws better than we did.

Lastly, roving wiretaps are probably one of the best law enforcement tools from the Patriot Act. Pre-paid phones and the fact that criminals routinely use multiple devices facilitated the need for a change in the wire-tap laws that were probably written in the days before cell phones and computers/internet even existed. The internet has left very little information private. It's all out there. Apply for a loan or a credit card and everyone and their mother will know your information. A few years back I ran my name through a paid search engine/data base and the information is spit back was absolutely incredible and unbelievable, all the way down to in-laws, my wife's history and maiden name, children's names, nick-names I used, and every address, rental and property I've EVER been associated with. It's the world we live in.