It's been apparent to me for some time that the war on terror is a smoke screen for the effort to roll back the civil and human rights protections achieved by the American people in the 1960s and "secure" the population from enforcing their own laws. It should be noted that "to secure" means to tie down or lock up. That the agents of law enforcement have been complicit in carrying out the security agenda is not a surprise. There's a big difference between being the agents of law enforcement and being "the law" and many individuals are enamored with the latter.

One other point I'd make in response to the statement by the last speaker in the video and that is that neither the Constitution nor the First Amendment in the Bill of Rights guarantees or protects or imparts the right to speak freely, assemble, or distribute information. What the Constitution does and the Bill of Rights affirms is to lay a prohibition on the agents of government--i.e. it outlines what they may not do. The rights are natural or God-given and may not be abridged. Does it make a difference? You bet. If the rights were given by the document, an amendment could take them away.