Obama Is Said to Consider Preventive Detention Plan (Flush the Constitution!)

NY Slimes (Page A18!!!) ^ | 5/21/2009 | SHERYL GAY STOLBERG

[LibertyRocks]

No mention on whether or not this would apply to U.S. CITIZENS is there? “PREVENTATIVE DETENTENTION”, eh?

This wouldn’t have anything to do with that HS memo about “Domestic Terrorism Watch List” would it? NAH, couldn’t be, right? And, I’m SURE Obama isn’t going to use a law like this against his own (former) supporters, especially those on the left who are now probably itching to start a protest against SOMETHING, right?

You know, I watched PBS two nights ago about the Kennedys (half interesting - half barf alert! LOL).

This really reminds me of when Bobby Kennedy confronted that sheriff about arresting people BEFORE a crime was committed because the sheriff just “KNEW” they were going to do something wrong...

The Communists really did infiltrate that party but good, didn’t they? And, NOW the liberals have, instead of a Communist “prodigy” like they wanted, a MUSLIM FASCIST DICTATOR with a Messiah complex and they fell for it all hook, line, and sinker - they must be so proud of themselves right now...

You know, if it didn’t mean dark times ahead for ALL citizens I might be tempted to laugh...

[silverleaf]

I believe he is mulling this in response to the unrepentant jihadis but once it become “legal” it could then be applied to anyone deemed a “terrorist”

such as people “refusing to cooperate” with quarantine orders during a flu epidemic or other disaster. Mass scope would preclude the ability to hold speedy trials

[ichabod1]

nah, I think this is what it says it is... today. The part where it morphs into a tool for him to, in a Lincolnesque way, jail his opposition comes later.

[JimSEA]

Isn't “preventive detention” exactly what the Burmese generals are doing with Aung San Suu Kyi? You can't do that in the USA. As much as I dislike Islam, I am not willing to go there. People picked up on the battlefield during a war are an entirely different matter. They must be shown, however, to be enemy combatants.

[Clint Williams]

I’ll have to take you word for that, but “preventive detention” cannot - repeat CANNOT - be a good thing.

But we do it already.

Think convicted sex offenders deemed too dangerous to be released AFTER their sentences are done. The precedent is established. Have a nice future.

America -- a great idea, didn't last.

[pillut48]

I’m sure liberals will call “Godwin!!” with the Nazi references here, but considering how much HolyO has been emboldened (read: sockpuppet controller George Soros, fellow sockpuppets in power Rahmbo and Axetogrindrod) it isn’t too far to imagine becoming a reality!! :-(

Oh, America! Sometimes I weep for you the way Jesus wept for Jerusalem!! :*( :*(

[ButThreeLeftsDo]

Tick.....tock.....

[Rebelbase]

The good thing about this is that we’ll all eventually be able to put a face to a screen name.

[tumblindice]

“terrorism suspects”=domestic terrorists
“domestic terrorists”=right wing extremists
“right wing extremists”=anyone who disagrees with their agenda: IOW, you and me

Islam is the religion of peace. 0 bows to them.

[ichabod1]

I don’t recall this site being a hotbed of enthusiasm for DHS. We all knew what it would be like, and it was a PC pile of cr@p right from the word go, with that Tom Ridge who looks like he’s deaf, to Count Chocula himself, Michael Cherktoff.

[ican'tbelieveit]

Sure is dragging right now...

[mikelets456]

“+++LESSON NO. 3: If a bureaucrat tells you that he must know if you have a firearm so he can put your name on a list for the common good, or wants to issue you an identity card so that you be more easily identified — tell him to go to hell. Registration of people and firearms is the required precursor to the tyranny which permits genocide. Bureaucrats cannot send soldiers to doors that are not on their list.++++”

In the state of NJ that is IMPOSSIBLE! Even if I buy a gun out of the state...any way around this?

[Las Vegas Ron]

that would establish a legal basis for the United States to incarcerate terrorism suspects who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried,

I wonder if that would include us Constitution loving, religious second amendment types

[ZULU]

“For some of the terrorists at Gitmo, this may be necessary.”

The nose of the camel. Bush didn't need this and Zero certainly doesn't either.

I can see just WHO Zero would consider a threat to national security: Second Amendment advocates, anti-abortion foes, anti-illegal aliens advocates, Christain fundamentalists, etc. STRAIGHT FROM JANET RENO NAPOLITANO'S MENU BOOK!!!!

[staytrue]

I am glad for the record firearm sales and record ammunition sales.

[mikelets456]

So explain what his words mean....that anyone who is “deemed a threat” they can deal with that person any way they want?

[rawhide]

Questions.

Who gets to decide who is to be detained?

And who gets to decide if they are a threat to national security?

Could Rush Limbaugh be detained under this?

Could anyone who disagrees with the Obama administration be considered a threat to national security and thus be detained, even if they could not prosecuted?

[Paine in the Neck]

Those requiring "preventive detention" can be recognized by their wearing or otherwise displaying reditions of this image

[Clint Williams]

Isn't “preventive detention” exactly what the Burmese generals are doing with Aung San Suu Kyi? You can't do that in the USA.

Yes you can. See #45.

I've long said the destruction of our rights will come by what we do with sex offenders. Those who would destroy our rights always focus on the most hated element of society -- and the public always cheers. Until it's their turn.

America -- a great idea, didn't last.

[SampleMan]

Preventive detention of foreigners is most understandable under many conditions. Being a POW is one of them.

The issue here is whether he intends to limit it to foreigners and if so, how the hell is this any different from what Bush was doing at Gitmo?