So I’ll it say again…
It is perfectly legal under the Constitution to hold foreign illegal enemy combatants that are captured by our military waging war against the United States.
Agreed. Our being signatories of the appropriate conventions (e.g., Hague, Geneva), provide for that right.
But that's not what the article said:
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 (note it says terrorism suspects, not enemy combatants) who are deemed a threat to national security but cannot be tried, two participants in the private session said.
If he was talking about enemy combatants, he should say enemy combatants. If he was talking about foreign fighters, he should say foreign fighters. The term "terrorism suspects" is so vague, it could apply to anybody the administration claims to be a terrorism suspect (US citizen or otherwise).
As I said in an earlier post, in order to be a "suspect," the government needs to assert to things: motive and capability.
(U) Key Findings
(U//LES) The DHS/Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) has no specific information that domestic rightwing* terrorists are currently planning acts of violence, but rightwing extremists may be gaining new recruits by playing on their fears about several emergent issues. The economic downturn and the election of the first African American president present unique drivers for rightwing radicalization and recruitment.
— (U//LES) Threats from white supremacist and violent antigovernment groups during 2009 have been largely rhetorical and have not indicated plans to carry out violent acts. Nevertheless, the consequences of a prolonged economic downturn—including real estate foreclosures, unemployment, and an inability to obtain credit—could create a fertile recruiting environment for rightwing extremists and even result in confrontations between such groups and government authorities similar to those in the past.
— (U//LES) Rightwing extremists have capitalized on the election of the first African American president, and are focusing their efforts to recruit new members, mobilize existing supporters, and broaden their scope and appeal through propaganda, but they have not yet turned to attack planning.
(U//FOUO) The current economic and political climate has some similarities to the 1990s when rightwing extremism experienced a resurgence fueled largely by an economic recession, criticism about the outsourcing of jobs, and the perceived threat to U.S. power and sovereignty by other foreign powers.
— (U//FOUO) During the 1990s, these issues contributed to the growth in the number of domestic rightwing terrorist and extremist groups and an increase in violent acts targeting government facilities, law enforcement officers, banks, and infrastructure sectors.
— (U//FOUO) Growth of these groups subsided in reaction to increased government scrutiny as a result of the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and disrupted plots, improvements in the economy, and the continued U.S. standing as the preeminent world power.
(U//FOUO) The possible passage of new restrictions on firearms and the return of military veterans facing significant challenges reintegrating into their communities could lead to the potential emergence of terrorist groups or lone wolf extremists capable of carrying out violent attacks.
* (U) Rightwing extremism in the United States can be broadly divided into those groups, movements, and adherents that are primarily hate-oriented (based on hatred of particular religious, racial or ethnic groups), and those that are mainly antigovernment, rejecting federal authority in favor of state or local authority, or rejecting government authority entirely. It may include groups and individuals that are dedicated to a single issue, such as opposition to abortion or immigration.
Comment: Note the bolded text above. The above groups could include any conservative...including FReepers.
A terrorist attack could consist of anything from throwing a Molotov cocktail, planting a single car bomb, assaulting an official (as opposed to battery), a computer virus, kidnapping, hijacking, or anything up to an including a WMD. See the MIPT database for past examples.
Almost any homeowner has the capability. For example, if you store any gasoline at home, you could create a Molotov cocktail. If you have ordinary lawn fertilizer, you could build a bomb.
"Yeah, but I don't know how to do that!" Well, it's your word versus a government agent's word. Who do you think will win?
I really think that the intent of this bill is to provide a legal basis to hold the Gitmo internees who won't be accepted back by their home countries. But once it's in place, if it is worded generically, who knows how it might eventually be applied...Consider the case of Ashton Lundbey, a 16 y/o kid (US citizen) who is being held incommunicado through the provisions of the Patriot Act.
Accordingly, POWs can be retained till the end of the conflict even if it's forever.