Preventive Detentions

[redvand]

Not even Bush tried this:

President Obama told human rights advocates at the White House on Wednesday that he was mulling the need for a “preventive detention” system 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…

“He was almost ruminating over the need for statutory change to the laws so that we can deal with individuals who we can’t charge and detain,” one participant said. “We’ve known this is on the horizon for many years, but we were able to hold it off with George Bush. The idea that we might find ourselves fighting with the Obama administration over these powers is really stunning.”

The other participant said Mr. Obama did not seem to be thinking about preventive detention for terrorism suspects now held at Guantánamo Bay, but rather for those captured in the future, in settings other than a legitimate battlefield like Afghanistan.

http://www.prisonplanet.com/obama-is-considering-doing-something-even-bush-didnt-try-preventive-detention-of-people-who-will-never-get-a-trial.html

[Geezah]

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
.......................

[seraosha]

I'll wait for a source more reliable than prisonplanet, thanks.

Found one at the nytimes (http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.html?_r=3&emc=eta1).

I'm astonished, if true.
All jokes about "thoughtcrime" aside...just how the fvck is this supposed to work?

[FullMetalJackass]

Hope and change bitches!

[MrScruff]

Oh, we've got that.

:(

[Sarig]

Wow.

1234567

[Dan2004]

Happy days are here at last! Wait, what?!

[click]

Great, now potential home grown terrorists who were former soldiers can be detained for no reason. Just what we need!

[deagle]

incarcerate is good, but if they have funds, they should be fined, unless posessions can be taken away.

[Chulo]

So we should NOT hold terrorist who HAVE committed attacks, but should get them BEFORE they attack. Yea Precog (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Precognition)! And wiretapping is an issue? oh yea, but Obama still uses them..

[LineDoggie]

I was about to throw a BS flag until Serosha found the NYT link.

What about their Constitutional Rights?

[Geezah]

What about their Constitutional Rights?

Under Soros's new Government, you have no rights.........

[LRPV]

Hoover must be rolling in his grave that he missed this President.

[LRPV]

Under Soros's new Government, you have no rights.........

Soros is about open Government.

[Geezah]

Soros is about open Government.

Yeah right.............you keep on believing the hype.

[Dan2004]

Isn't this a violation of the Sixth Ammendment?

EDIT: Yes it is. Googled it.

[Chulo]

Isn't this a violation of the Sixth Ammendment?

EDIT: Yes it is. Googled it.
Its Bush's fault and he did it too...

<typical response>

[budgie]

Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss

http://www.militaryphotos.net/forums/picture.php?albumid=802&pictureid=12320

[AZZenny]

Look, nothing here says suspension of Habeas Corpus. It says look at a new legal framework to handle these cases. We all know they do exist, even if in very small number.

Something based generally on Israel's 'Administrative Detention' system, if run legitimately, may work -- it does involve right to legal counsel, Red Cross, etc etc., and requires independent judicial review every 6 or 12 months to determine if the conditions justifying detention continue to hold true -- either extreme national security risk if it went to trial (because the usual rules of evidence apply if it does), or it would be a direct danger to the safety of the nation if released.

It was on the basis of such a judicial review that a Hamas parliamentarian was released in Israel last week over military objections, when the judge said neither the nat'l security issues or the danger conditions could be adequately demonstrated.

The problem is not indefinite detentions - we already have variations of that with *** offenders. The critical issues in this are 'disappearing' people, and endorsing torture.

[Laconian]

If this is some way of dealing with foreign nationals captured overseas, there is no 6th Amendment issue, just like there is no 5th Amendment right - the subjects were captured on the field of battle.

If however this is how somebody plans to deal with folks taken on US soil, whether they are citizens or not, then all of the Constitutional rights apply. We are letting the Government, particularly the Executive, go far beyond their Constitutional powers and it is becoming scary.