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?
“Who gets to decide who is to be detained?”
-Why, your local Political Commissar/Party Gaultier/ Democrat Precinct Committeeman, OF COURSE!
“And who gets to decide if they are a threat to national security?”
-SEE ABOVE....
“Could Rush Limbaugh be detained under this?”
-YES....
“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?”
-YES...
Remember, the Nazi Gaultier’s operated in “good faith.”
They believed what they were doing was right. Even if they did not so believe, they were just “following orders”.
Welcome to the Fascist States of America, folks...
NOW you begin to undersatnd why Obama called the Constitution a “fatally-flawed Document”.
The 'who' is bad enough, but the basis for this decision is only codified in a vague policy statement written by a bureaucrat.
Without law, there is no rule of law.
When being a "threat" becomes contingent on arbitrary and capricous criteria, the rule of law is subverted.
But then, we battle against principalities and powers...