Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama Is Said to Consider Preventive Detention Plan

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Meeker Morgan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:35 PM
Original message
Obama Is Said to Consider Preventive Detention Plan
Obama Is Said to Consider Preventive Detention Plan
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/21/us/politics/21obama.h...
The New York Times

WASHINGTON 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, two participants in the private session said.

The discussion, in a 90-minute meeting in the Cabinet Room that included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and other top administration officials, came on the eve of a much-anticipated speech Mr. Obama is to give Thursday on a number of thorny national security matters, including his promise to close the detention center at the naval base in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba.

The discussion, in a 90-minute meeting in the Cabinet Room that included Attorney General Eric H. Holder Jr. and other top administration officials, came on the eve of a much-anticipated speech Mr. Obama is to give Thursday on a number of thorny national security matters, including his promise to close the detention center at the naval base in Guantnamo Bay, Cuba.

(more)


I suppose he's trying to show Cheney he's not a wimp after all?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
RUMMYisFROSTED Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:36 PM
Response to Original message
1. Glory! Flag!
Horseshit.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:39 PM
Response to Original message
2. Unsourced hearsay by biased parties is suspect. President Obama has never used that phrase.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 03:41 PM by ClarkUSA
The MSM never stops trying to stir the pot, do they? This is a dupe, BTW. This story was hashed out here the day it was written.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:44 PM
Response to Reply #2
4. It's not unsourced at all. Vince Warren has gone on record
in more than one venue as the head of Center for Constitutional Rights. As you would know if you'd read the "hashing out".
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:54 PM
Response to Reply #4
7. self-delete/dupe
Edited on Mon May-25-09 03:56 PM by ClarkUSA

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #7
10. Vince Warren has SAID he was one of the sources.
Are you calling this human rights organization "biased"? Heaven forfend CCR should expose its "bias" in defense of the Constitution!

And your "dishonesty" assertion is ridiculous. How many details do you need to know that holding someone without charge and indefinitely is illegal, not to mention, flies in the face of more than 200 years of American jurisprudence?

Maybe bringing "intellectual dishonesty" into this discussion is a bad move on your part.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #10
12. Not in the OP's story, he didn't. Link, quote?
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:05 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:05 PM
Response to Reply #12
15. Vince Warren did at least two interviews, on Rachel's show and
on Amy's show where he identified HIMSELF as one of those witnesses.

The segment on Rachel's show is in the video forum and the one on Amy's show is here:

http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/22/vince_warren
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:07 PM
Response to Reply #15
17. Nonetheless, it's hearsay interpretation of what Pres. Obama said by a biased source.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:12 PM by ClarkUSA
I prefer to wait to pass judgment until I see the final plan from the WH which Pres. Obama has said is subject to approval by both Congress and the courts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:14 PM
Response to Reply #17
21. What bias would that be? I'd love to know. CCR's work is impeccable.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #21
23. See Reply #19.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
8. Read the story. Vince Warren is not mentioned at all & the "two participants" wanted anonymity.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 03:57 PM by ClarkUSA
Again, President Obama has never used that term and considering we have yet to see a detailed plan for closing Gitmo yet, anyone speaking as if he or she knew what the President is going to do is being intellectually dishonest at best and a liar at worst.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
QC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:51 PM
Response to Reply #2
6. Those who spread such rumors must be placed in preventive detention
for the good of the people.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:03 PM
Response to Reply #6
13. We have always been at war with the Constitution. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Xipe Totec Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:41 PM
Response to Original message
3. Welcome to the FBI's pre-crime division




Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Mojambo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 03:49 PM
Response to Original message
5. The phrase "Preventive Detention" sends a fucking chill down my spine. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:00 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. It's meant to. President Obama never said it.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:01 PM by ClarkUSA
The spin is clear and it's dishonest, given that no one knows the details of the eventual plan that Congress and the courts will have to approve.


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:02 PM
Response to Reply #9
11. Nope. He used both terms. Prolonged detention for the people
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:02 PM by EFerrari
we are already holding and preventive detention for people we are yet to capture.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:04 PM
Response to Reply #11
14. Link to a transcript where he is quoted as saying "preventative detention"?
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:05 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:06 PM
Response to Reply #14
16. It's "preventive detention" and the link is in #15. n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:10 PM
Response to Reply #16
18. Hearsay interpretation of what Pres. Obama said in a private meeting by a biased source is suspect.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:12 PM by ClarkUSA
Again, I prefer to wait to pass judgment until I see the final plan from the WH which Pres. Obama has said is subject to approval by both Congress and the courts.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:13 PM
Response to Reply #18
19. A biased source?
What is the bias you're objecting to here?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:16 PM
Response to Reply #19
22. bias - Definition from the Merriam-Webster Online Dictionary
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:17 PM by ClarkUSA
"3 a: bent, tendency b: an inclination of temperament or outlook"

Link: http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/bias


Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:17 PM
Response to Reply #22
24. You're avoiding the question. How is Warren biased? Thanks.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:24 PM
Response to Reply #24
28. His obvious "outlook" and "bent" on the issue of detainees is the definition of "bias".

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #28
31. And those would be what?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:29 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. Go play with someone who has time to waste. Your fallacy re: Vince Warren has been exposed.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:32 PM by ClarkUSA
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:35 PM
Response to Reply #32
34. Still avoiding the question. And you should. Because CCR
has not a blot on their record.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:23 PM
Response to Reply #18
27. Obama never used the term. Vince Warren admits he never used the term. Case closed.
From the link in #15:

"What was very surprising was to hear President Obama talk about what he called prolonged detention, but what I think we can all safely say is preventive detention, moving forward, the idea of detaining people not because theyve committed a crime, but because of their general dangerousness or that they may commit a crime in the future. Thats something that the documents that President Obama was standing in front of, particularly the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, simply doesnt permit. And when I heard that in his speech, I was deeply, deeply shocked that he would go in that direction."

Clearly an independent "interpretation"...

The blogosphere, MSM, and DU is FILLED with this kind of bullshit!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:27 PM
Response to Reply #27
30. Thank you for the FACTS. Bookmarked for future use.
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:28 PM by ClarkUSA
The blogosphere, MSM, and DU is FILLED with this kind of bullshit!

Ad nauseum and always by the usual suspects. But we know better.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:38 PM
Response to Reply #30
35. Hoisted...!
by her own petard.

I love it when someone provides the very link that bursts their bubble. :P

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

Contained this: http://www.democracynow.org/2009/5/22/vince_warren

Which I dutifully read. LOL.

:patriot:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #35
37. Try again. It's the kind of bullshit you have to discount if you have to accept
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ClarkUSA Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:46 PM
Response to Reply #35
39. ROFL
Edited on Mon May-25-09 04:56 PM by ClarkUSA
Excellent job!! I'll be chuckling about this one for the rest of the evening. :fistbump:

I noticed the moving of goal posts to avoid admitting that his/her insistence that President Obama used the term "preventative detention" as per Vince Warren's testimony is completely false. That's so predictable, it's funny. :D



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:20 PM
Response to Reply #16
26. "Im notstill not allowed to talk about the substance of the meeting..."
I don't see how Vince's words on the topic he shouldn't be talking about come any where near a direct quote by the POTUS.

:shrug:

What he DOES say is pretty subjective:

"...The problem is that he goes out the next day, and he has a speech in which he not only embraces the opposition, meaning George Bushs policies, but then he comes out with things that even George Bush didnt come out with, like preventive detention...."

And HERE is where he make's shit up, CHANGES Obama's words, that he offers here second-hand:

What was very surprising was to hear President Obama talk about what he called prolonged detention, but what I think we can all safely say is preventive detention, moving forward, the idea of detaining people not because theyve committed a crime, but because of their general dangerousness or that they may commit a crime in the future. Thats something that the documents that President Obama was standing in front of, particularly the Bill of Rights and the Constitution, simply doesnt permit. And when I heard that in his speech, I was deeply, deeply shocked that he would go in that direction.

So, I have no problem with the CCR or ACLU, their job is to be vigorous advocates.

But sometimes they resort to spin, distortion, and other tactics that are less than objective in pursuing their goals.

You're not going to find a source for Obama ever using the term "preventative detention".

Obama never used the term...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:34 PM
Response to Reply #26
33. So, are you saying that Obama used the term "prolonged detention"
when he meant preventive detention? If he was misunderstood, I'm sure you have a clarification by the White House to answer ACLU, Amnesty, CCR, Turley, Greenwald, Pro Publica and all the rest?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:44 PM
Response to Reply #33
36. No, I'm saying that Vince Warren is full of shit. And it's not going to stick.
Not here, not anywhere.

The quote from YOUR link to democracy now is pretty clear, Vince INVENTED the term.

There's no way to re-spin that into your question above, about what Obama may have meant, how the hell should I know?

I wasn't there and I haven't seen any video on point. And anything spun out of ACLU, AI, CCR, Turley :wtf:, et al, is not automatically reliable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EFerrari Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:45 PM
Response to Reply #36
38. Vince didn't invent the term. Do a search and see for yourself
all the legal scholars that are in collusion with him.

lol
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 06:02 PM
Response to Reply #38
41. Yes, several others have adopted the incorrect term, "preventive detention".
Edited on Mon May-25-09 06:18 PM by NYC_SKP
I read all your links, thank you.

Most of them do not quote the president and his term, "prolonged detention", but instead prefer "preventive detention".

There is a distinction, and for some of the detainees, both may pertain, but we must agree: Obama did not use the term.

BTW, I liked that the ACLU's used the word "Indefinite", which is better, except that they kept the "preventive": "Indefinite Preventive Detention", and I'm afraid "preventive" connotes future acts and is thus misleading.

Thank you for the useful links. I also liked the propublica article.

:hi:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
20. Ancient news. The next day he made a speech that was rather well noticed
where he discussed the fact that it May be necessary. It was discussed here at length in dozens of threads.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.ph...

The ACLU and others have given a very muted response awaiting the actual details, which seems like a prudent response.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
masuki bance Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:18 PM
Response to Reply #20
25. Reality, finally.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
NYC_SKP Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 04:26 PM
Response to Reply #20
29. I must have missed that OP, what an excellent post.
Alas, too late to recommend. :thumbsup:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
grantcart Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 05:25 PM
Response to Reply #29
40. Well somebody posted it here and you can digg it if you are so inclined

(I was googling to find something on a related thread and found that it was the number one google on the subject, even though I didn't post it. I resisted the temptation to quote the pirated publication even though I agree with it 100% lol.)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftofthedial Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon May-25-09 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
42. "cannot be tried"
-spit-
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Wed Jul 23rd 2014, 07:51 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC